Basically PA executive is arguing they did everything by the book. The PA legislature just filed with TEXAS saying that PA executive fucked up and didn't and isn't following what they prescribed by law.
How the fuck is PA AG going to argue he did no wrong when the legislature is on the other side of the fucking aisle saying he fucked up? This is going to be an absolute calamity of historical proportions.
Act 77 is a fucking shitshow. There are 2 arguments against it:
Act 77 violates the Pennsylvania state constitution. This is the argument in the Kelly case (iirc). This argument is not addressed by the Amicus Brief.
Act 77 was amended by the activist PA State Supreme Court and then amended further through fiat by the PA Secretary of State. This is the "Article 2" argument, since US Constitution Article 2 says the legislature's power to determine electors is absolute. If the legislature establishes a procedure, no state court and definitely not a state official can just up and change it. This is the argument in the Texas case.
This Amicus Brief is in support of the 2nd argument. In other words: "This law has been modified to be something the state legislators did not intent. Signed: THE STATE LEGISLATORS WHO WROTE THE FUCKING LAW."
It is against judicial activism, but against the State Supreme Court's judicial activism. It is in favor of the US Supreme Court providing a remedy against State Supreme Court fuckery.
Amicus Curiae, Members of the General Assembly, were directly involved in
the passage of Act 77 of 2019 (Act of October 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 (“Act 77”)) and Act 12 of 2020 (Act of Mar. 27, 2020, § 1, P.L. No. 41, No. 12.), and have a direct and substantial interest in ensuring that the province and duty of lawmakers and legislatures of each state to create laws is protected from overreach by the executive and judicial branches.
...
In a decision rendered on September 17, 2020, less than seven weeks before
Election Day, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania unilaterally and in contravention
of the express wording of Act 77 extended the deadline for mail-in ballots to be
received from Election Day to three days following Election Day, declared that ballots mailed without a postmark be presumed to have been received timely, and mandated that mail-in ballots lacking a verified voter signature be accepted. See In re: November 3, 2020 General Election, Civil Action No. 149 MM 2020.
Bigly. Since this is a separation of powers issue, the legislative branches of PA and GA are standing up and saying "Yeah, the executive branch changed the rules without us signing off on it, and that's not legal."
Yes, that was odd. However I read the whole thing and it is 100% supportive of Texas complaint in regards to Pennsylvania. It seems a very clear cut and blatant usurpation by the PA court and SoS. I read the SCOTUS decision on that Wisconsin case and what Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wrote -- they will tear PA a new asshole on this.
Fucking huge. GA and now PA general assemblies. Huge.
A Manchurian candidate that almost certainly won the governorship through fruad.
Since Pennsylvania did that then they wont be giving up electors to the pedo sniffer...Win
Wait what?
The state of PA (executive branch) files AGAINST Texas
The general assembly (house) of PA legislature files IN SUPPORT OF TEXAS
Some PA senators file a neutral amicus brief in support of neither Texas nor PA
Sounds like a contested election.
Ultimately the legislature decides the election. That's why Texas is suing the states, they rejected the legislative part of the election.
So for these legislatures to agree with Texas, the case is pretty much done
Lets use dominion voting systems to tally the votes. /s
I don't think anything says disputed electors as much as this!
brb popcorn
brb cornpop
brb, rubbing my hairy legs
The senators, in their brief, actually came across as being in support of Texas, even though the title of their brief stated they were neutral.
/> some senators
There's only 2 in every state
State senators?
Yeah. "Some" implies that the are others and they acted differently
No I think they meant some PA state Senators there are 50 of them. Not Pa’s US Senators. I could be wrong.
I guess I was dumb, I thought a state senator WAS the US senator
Basically PA executive is arguing they did everything by the book. The PA legislature just filed with TEXAS saying that PA executive fucked up and didn't and isn't following what they prescribed by law.
This is a fucking mess. Democrats have shit on the birthday cake.
Pennsylvania sues itself
How the fuck is PA AG going to argue he did no wrong when the legislature is on the other side of the fucking aisle saying he fucked up? This is going to be an absolute calamity of historical proportions.
Best timeline
Act 77 is a fucking shitshow. There are 2 arguments against it:
Act 77 violates the Pennsylvania state constitution. This is the argument in the Kelly case (iirc). This argument is not addressed by the Amicus Brief.
Act 77 was amended by the activist PA State Supreme Court and then amended further through fiat by the PA Secretary of State. This is the "Article 2" argument, since US Constitution Article 2 says the legislature's power to determine electors is absolute. If the legislature establishes a procedure, no state court and definitely not a state official can just up and change it. This is the argument in the Texas case.
This Amicus Brief is in support of the 2nd argument. In other words: "This law has been modified to be something the state legislators did not intent. Signed: THE STATE LEGISLATORS WHO WROTE THE FUCKING LAW."
It is against judicial activism, but against the State Supreme Court's judicial activism. It is in favor of the US Supreme Court providing a remedy against State Supreme Court fuckery.
We're hitting levels of trolling that shouldn't be possible!!
CONGRATULATIONS, YOU PLAYED YOURSELF.
OR TRUST NOBODY, NOT EVEN YOURSELF.
Amicus Curiae, Members of the General Assembly, were directly involved in the passage of Act 77 of 2019 (Act of October 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 (“Act 77”)) and Act 12 of 2020 (Act of Mar. 27, 2020, § 1, P.L. No. 41, No. 12.), and have a direct and substantial interest in ensuring that the province and duty of lawmakers and legislatures of each state to create laws is protected from overreach by the executive and judicial branches.
...
In a decision rendered on September 17, 2020, less than seven weeks before Election Day, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania unilaterally and in contravention of the express wording of Act 77 extended the deadline for mail-in ballots to be received from Election Day to three days following Election Day, declared that ballots mailed without a postmark be presumed to have been received timely, and mandated that mail-in ballots lacking a verified voter signature be accepted. See In re: November 3, 2020 General Election, Civil Action No. 149 MM 2020.
Does this actually impact the case at all? Can judges use the mere fact that they filed a.brief as part of the legitimacy of the case’s claims?
Yes.
Bigly. Since this is a separation of powers issue, the legislative branches of PA and GA are standing up and saying "Yeah, the executive branch changed the rules without us signing off on it, and that's not legal."
That definitely seems important and that it could make a difference. Frankly this while year has been a separation of powers issue
How the fuck can you win when your own legislature says you broke the law lmfao.. too rich
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!?!?!? -TRUMPUS MAXIMUS
AND MY AXE
It makes me feel hopeful, that their are still honest politicians who are patriots.
Big news! Good to know that if it comes back to them we can maybe rely on them.
Wait.. it said they filed "in support of complainant/defendant"...
Yes, that was odd. However I read the whole thing and it is 100% supportive of Texas complaint in regards to Pennsylvania. It seems a very clear cut and blatant usurpation by the PA court and SoS. I read the SCOTUS decision on that Wisconsin case and what Gorsuch and Kavanaugh wrote -- they will tear PA a new asshole on this.
I have no fucking clue what’s going on! WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEEEEAAANNNN????
It means SCOTUS cannot ignore this.
If you haven't read this, invest the time and do it now. It's important.
Hah!!!
THANK YOU PA LEGISATURE FOR YOUR COURAGE!! ANY STATE OFFICIALS WHO ARE AGAINST TEXAS IS AGAINST AMERICA.. In my opinion.