20 The 64 Trillion Dollar question on my mind is just WHO would have non-contestable standing under the cited Article 3? posted 127 days ago by latetotheparty 127 days ago by latetotheparty +20 / -0 The only unacceptable answer is "nobody"... This ruling had NOTHING to do with the merits of the case and 200% to do with procedural matters. 4 comments share 4 comments share save hide report block hide child comments Comments (4) sorted by: top new old worst ▲ 1 ▼ – flaming_death 1 point 127 days ago +1 / -0 Great question. Clearly, the legislatures alone can determine how electors are chosen. Clearly, it was not legislatures that did that. So, how does that get enforced? Who has to bring the case? WHO HAS STANDING? permalink save report block reply ▲ 1 ▼ – deleted 1 point 127 days ago +1 / -0 ▲ 1 ▼ – conservativefrank 1 point 127 days ago +1 / -0 Nobody. Notice leftists had standing when they went to courts to override election laws. Now it's time to reverse the cheat and restore the laws that were illegally overridden, but now courts have no jurisdiction and people no standing. permalink save report block reply ▲ 1 ▼ – deleted 1 point 127 days ago +1 / -0
Great question.
Clearly, the legislatures alone can determine how electors are chosen.
Clearly, it was not legislatures that did that.
So, how does that get enforced? Who has to bring the case?
WHO HAS STANDING?
Nobody.
Notice leftists had standing when they went to courts to override election laws. Now it's time to reverse the cheat and restore the laws that were illegally overridden, but now courts have no jurisdiction and people no standing.