So essentially, if Scotus doesn't rule in favor of Trump. Scotus takes away all authority it has? If the states can ignore the Constitution (Scotus deciding what is constitutional) then their future rulings are just suggestions?
I can't see how Trump loses this case. Doomers get in here and tell me I'm wrong.
If SCOTUS rules that laws no longer matter, i got big plans for 2021.
Scotus can rule that the state legislators still have an avenue for relief (sending their own electors) and they would hear an appellate decision after congress votes on which elector group to use.
if they rule against texas, then it sends a clear message out to the rest of the nation that the constitution is useless.
in that case, the plan of action is: 1.) pence reads out the electoral votes in congress 2.) suddenly pence takes out a black bag underneath the podium he’s speaking at and what does he find? surprise! he finds thousands of electoral votes for trump 3.) pence counts all the extra electoral votes because obviously the constitution doesn’t mean anything and that means we can do whatever the fuck we want. 4.) victory!
8======D Joe Biden
Don't fall for the binary choice. Courts love them some grey area, so consider some more creative outcomes such as voiding the electors for those states, or seeing them aside and kicking it back to the states to count only lawful ballots and then redo their slate of electors, or just voiding the election completely as irreversibly tainted and kick it to the state delegations to determine their electors.
The complaint and briefs step through several remedies,..
Ruling against this would seem to imply effectively no faith in the commonly accepted interpretations of the relevant protections. People have phrased that as them saying the constitution doesn’t matter but that’s not what that ruling would mean necessarily. Does anyone know what it would mean actually? Absolutely not. Is it likely that they’ll rule against Texas? No.
Its hard to see how scotus doesn't find the actions by the 4 states unconstitutional. They ruled a week or so ago about how pandemic doesn't mean your rights go away in the case brought by a church. Where things will get interesting is in the remedy.
Texas: "The United States was created with the intent of all states following the laws and rules of the Constitution. If we do not follow those laws and rules, we as the United States dissolve because the rules mean nothing and the Constitution is just meaningless words on a old ass piece of paper."
Also Texas: "MI/WI/GA/PA are cheatin' bitches"
Texas Shortly Afterwards if SCOTUS does not rule for Trump: "We're creating the country of Texas, you cheatin' fuckers."
I'm not a doomer, but you asked so here's your answer. There seem to be at least three ways that TX could still lose. 1. TX might not have standing because SCOTUS might say that even if the other states didn't follow their legislatures' election procedures TX didn't suffer an injury because the election might not have turned out any different if the procedures had been followed properly. 2. TX could be wrong on the merits, meaning that it could be possible SCOTUS says that the other states' election laws had enough leeway to permit the deviations to the procedures. 3. SCOTUS could say TX wins but might say that the proper remedy is to have the VP not count the fraudulent electoral college votes, which would result in a Biden victory unless the state legislatures appoint their own electors. Throwing out the electoral college votes for the four state would make the final electoral college vote 244-232 in favor of Biden, and the constitution only requires a majority of the electoral votes cast, so 270 isn't actually needed.
www.thefederalist.com/2020/12/09/6-things-to-know-about-texass-supreme-court-petition-over-2020s-messed-up-election/
Try this to get a basic understanding of the suit.
The courts don't work how you think, if the law was followed this is a simple case and it would be decided in Trump's favor.
However, courts are made up of people, they can have biased or misinformed views, there are a few outs for SCOTUS including refusing to take the case at all or even dismissing it due to lack of standing.
The media and big tech has been ramping up pressure on SCOTUS for a month, every time a justice watches TV or goes online they are seeing that Biden won and the election is a fait accompli. The propaganda works on the SCOTUS Justices like it does on most people.
Then there is the threat of violence, the left are violent and we are not. Perhaps if the Constitution is torn up and a fraudulent election installs Biden we might become violent but so far we have proven to be passive.
A second Trump term would see a lot of the swamp in jail, the whole corrupt system would be be revealed, so the CIA, FBI and others like the CCP are going to be putting pressure on SCOTUS. That threat to their freedom and ill gotten wealth is why they even stole this election to start with, it was a move from desperation.
This really doesn't come down to just the law, if that was the sole issue, we have a very good chance but it comes down to the SCOTUS justices having courage, that I am not so sure about.
It would be hard to risk it politically:
👉 As a justice, would you risk dems packing and diluting your power and ruining checks and balances by letting both the Executive and Legislative play around with the SC?
👉 Would they risk the backlash of a potential civil war? The argument they have against it is basically that: dangling 81.5M angry people (who may or may not exist) as a sort of nuke. But that right also has to make that claim to balance theirs.
👉 It's also a chance for the Conservative justices to gain more power for conservatives. They can even touch on the GA senate races, if the forensics on the machines come in or more evidence is presented, but for the sake of the current argument, it's just the constitutionality of the state court rulings.
👉 They can also choose to abstain from it, since Roberts has already set precedent that the SC doesn't mess with State constitutions. However, the Gore vs Bush also forced the SC to intervene.
👉 But seriously, 17 AG's so far? Not to mention heavyweight Ted Cruz is going to argue.
👉 It's pretty much obvious they broke their own rules, so what is the remedy?
👉 Unlikely that they will outright give Trump the votes directly so they might leave it to the State legislatures.
👉 The state legislatures need to stall for more evidence to prove the fraud, then choose to award them to Trump. They need to also undo the media build up of Biden. Probably why we see the trickling news. More people need to be implicated. The news about Hunter and the China spy is a good start. Joe needs to be delegitimized to undo the hype.
👉 The SC can also leave it to congress and Trump would win.
So really, what has to happen is leverage the leverage that the left has:
☑️ Media - take it back on other platforms
☑️ Stay Loud and Grow the Base
☑️ Threaten civil war like they did in Arizona and it got things moving 😆
And if laws no longer matter, prepare your asshole lefties. Insurrection Act inbound. And if you riot when they rule in favor of law and order.... Insurrection Act inbound.
Congrats to all lefties, you played youself.
Here's how Bernie can still win
A) supreme court ruled that legislatures in all states must convene to select electors, with the knowledge that the democrat party broke laws on mass basis in an effort both steal an election and cover it up.
The legislatures meet and Bernie gets enough Electoral College votes to be President.
B) the supreme court decides that the election is so fraud filled that there is no way of knowing the true outcome and therefore none of the states in question are allowed to send electors, and therefore the election decision is sent to the House per rules of the constitution. The House Republicans decide that they all want chinese hoes like swallowell so they vote for bernie instead of Trump.
My only concern is that the court tends to decide and allow others to deal with the reaction.
“Ok you are right.”
“Ok now what.”
“Not our problem. You figure that part out.”