Before the Texas case the Court could have rejected appeals from the Trump campaign and voters saying it's a political issue, not for them.
Now any decision they make will be political. Yes, that was true before, but they could say not getting involved was the only way to not be political. Now they can't do that. They piss off the blue States, or they piss off the red States, and they can't split the baby.
Might as well do the right thing then.
i would argue differently! i would argue that it actually instills that ther are various interpretations of the constitution (but the favor lies within the numbers of liberal interpretations vs. originalists with the patriots) ive had wine that probably does not make sense but - i think it gives the people an opportunity to see how the three branches of government do in fact have checks and balances it gives each branch the power they are intended to have by law outliend in the Constitution - legislators should write law, court should rule on it based on its consitutionality that is what is happening here that is what the dems tried to subvert its an open and shut case again this might not make sense right now but my thoughts are aligned in my own head - hopefully here too
by the way - the ACB hearings and, for anyone who watched them know they heard ACB repeatedly say to the dems "it's your job to draw up the legislature and it's my job to interpret whether it should be written into law based on how constitutional it is"
seems to align pretty well with the lesson we are getting now..