7910
posted ago by 3stepsahead ago by 3stepsahead +7912 / -2

The court's 5-3 ruling means that absentee ballots will be counted only if they are in the hands of municipal clerks by the time polls close on Nov. 3.

The justices determined the courts shouldn't be the ones to decide the election rules amid the coronavirus pandemic that is surging in Wisconsin and across the world.

"The Constitution provides that state legislatures — not federal judges, not state judges, not state governors, not other state officials — bear primary responsibility for setting election rules," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a concurring opinion.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/26/u-s-supreme-court-declines-change-wisconsins-voting-rules/3670662001/

Comments (623)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
132
DagnyDocket 132 points ago +132 / -0

It’s a living document, they say. I heard Scalia speak years ago during law school, before Trump, in the thick of the liberal academic indoctrination. And Scalia loathed the lie of the living document. That was the day I really started to wake up.

58
deleted 58 points ago +58 / -0
4
RallyinStJohnsWood 4 points ago +4 / -0

It can be changed, hence the amendment but their is a process and justices ruling against what is written, has been ruled in the past or their interpretation of founders intentions is not that process

I have trouble figuring out what you're trying to say here.

3
sinister_dwarf 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not OP, but I think what he’s saying is that the Constitution can be changed, but there’s a process for that. A justice can’t just rule against precedent or based on their personal feelings to change what the Constitution really means.