1186
Comments (57)
sorted by:
63
undef 63 points ago +63 / -0

The court cannot ignore 40+ states and hope to keep the union intact.

54
TheEmoEngineer 54 points ago +54 / -0

Lol the blue states fucked up bigly by responding. Now SCOTUS has to issue a ruling. Before, they could have ignored us on some procedural ground.

45
undef 45 points ago +45 / -0

We've got over 40 states, two territories, DC, POTUS, 106 congressional representatives, and several dozen state senators and representatives that have filed briefs in this case.

Ignoring this case was never an option. It will either be settled in a manner that everyone can tolerate, or it will be featured in future textbooks as the prelude to war.

30
deleted 30 points ago +30 / -0
22
undef 22 points ago +22 / -0

Exactly. The difference is this time I don't think there would be a 4 year delay between SCOTUS ruling and war breaking out.

The states have already drawn the battle lines.

14
GlacialSpeed 14 points ago +15 / -1

Fucking hell....

Please no war.

I'm ready for sure, but I've literally never killed an American and never want to.

Even the brainwashed commie sympathizers. I just want to prove them completely wrong and rub truth salt in their faces for the next 20 years.

11
TheWatcherWhoWatches 11 points ago +11 / -0

"I'm ready for sure, but I've literally never killed an American and never want to"

Because you're not an unbalanced sociopath. Unlike the opposition

7
NormaJeanRocks 7 points ago +7 / -0

Me neither, but I'd have no problem killing someone thats trying to burn my house down or drag me out of a car and beat me to death, like we've seen happen over these past few months. If that comes to my area.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
3
CALI_MAGA_MAMA 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, if we don't get to scrub them with truth salt for 20 years, we all lose.

1
PatriotsWinBigly 1 point ago +1 / -0

THIS

9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
3
undef 3 points ago +3 / -0

Let's hope you're wrong.

If it comes down to neighbors fighting neighbors, my money is on the side that owns almost all of the guns winning decisively.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
KickingPugilist 4 points ago +4 / -0

Jeb Scott

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
5
KickingPugilist 5 points ago +5 / -0

Please whip.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
4
MakeAmericaWinAgain 4 points ago +4 / -0

And over 80,000,000 Patriots

4
Staatssicherheit 4 points ago +5 / -1

New legal elections should be tolerable to everybody on both sides.

15
deleted 15 points ago +15 / -0
10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
3
VetforTrump 3 points ago +3 / -0

Or 100 mlion armed Americans

19
Sarrwell 19 points ago +19 / -0

I was wondering when to expect them to respond by but I don't always know where to find this type of info at. Thank you!

17
Well_Shave_MY_Taint 17 points ago +17 / -0

The publisher of Scotusblog says in so many words, I'm a knee jerk libtard:

5 glaring problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states

  • SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court
12
Staatssicherheit 12 points ago +12 / -0

That could be a possible argument if the PA, GA, WI, MI State Legislatures had not become parties/file amci briefs. They have. There is no question about standing now.

3
0rthogonal 3 points ago +3 / -0

I thought it was only PA and GA state reps signing on. When did MI and WI legislatures file?

5
Staatssicherheit 5 points ago +5 / -0

PA and MI State Legislators are intervening parties.

PA State Senators and General Assembly with the Speaker and Majority are Amici. Along with GA State Legislators. I don't see WI anywhere. I was wrong about that.

6
BLMadeMeRaysis 6 points ago +6 / -0

One of the biggest lessons I've learned from TD is to always check the name, early life, and photo of a source. Finding the saboteurs of public discourse then becomes easy.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
2
WildSauce 2 points ago +2 / -0

That standing argument is totally meaningless with Trump intervening as plaintiff now. Trump obviously has standing to bring this case, even if Texas doesn't (although they do).

1
TheSwiftPepe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep. Came here to say that account is cucked

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
13
deleted 13 points ago +13 / -0
4
killerbunny88 4 points ago +5 / -1

I always imagine that bratty little girl on Willy Wonka whenever someone says "I want it noooowwww!" lol

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
3
Comingupblank 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think of those fucking JG Wentworth commercials.

"It's my money, and I want it now. Call J. G. Wentworth 877-cash-now. 877-cash-now"

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
9
MAGAWookie 9 points ago +9 / -0

So what does this mean? Is there a trial or something?

4
Sargentpilcher 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, seriously. Will there be a trial? Is this how the Supreme Court operates? By e-mail?

7
BrotherMungus 7 points ago +7 / -0

I don't have a copy of the Constitution in front of me to quote the section and paragraph, but I'm fairly certain there's a provision that says each side designates team members to participate in an "Apache Relay" (just like the one in the movie "Heavyweights")

3
IsrorOrca 3 points ago +4 / -1

What are the odds that SCOTUS waits until after the Run-Off in GA. If the two seats are lost to D or Split 1/1 then they act? Otherwise if GA wins both, in THEORY the damage isn't done in the senate.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Brandon_IT 1 point ago +1 / -0

One of the arguments made in the Texas suit alleges Texas will suffer damage (which is important if you want to bring a lawsuit) if the Vice-President is elected as they will control the Senate if both GA races tilt Democrat.

Because of this, SCOTUS might wait until after the GA election but if they do, then I don't think the current election will be overturned as the time for the Electoral College to vote will have passed. Now, if the election is in the House of Representatives, they MIGHT could push it until then. Because I don't think the new House & Senate will vote on the Presidential election under the 12th Amendment until AFTER January 6th - 1 day after the GA election.

But if SCOTUS decides to hinge everything on the GA election, that's going to really throw a monkey wrench into everything.

Just my opinion.

1
Atldtw 1 point ago +1 / -0

🙏🙏🙏🙏

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DemDestroyer 1 point ago +1 / -0

So nice they dont have to wake RBG from her naps any more.. we're enjoying her dirt nap...

1
DwellerMike 1 point ago +1 / -0

Act.. as in accept and go to trial or act as in verdict?