SCOTUS said "no standing". In this case, since SCOTUS is the jurisdiction, it means Texas has no injury. This is true, Texas doesn't have an injury (dilution, failure of equal protection) until electors cast votes based on the results of the defendant states' tainted polling of their populace. State legislatures may correct this before those votes are cast.
If they do not, Texas will have injury; and will have standing.
They did not say Texas had no injury. They said Texas does not get to concern itself with how other states run their elections. It was a terrible statement by the freshman justices.
The act of not taking the case is a miscarriage of justice.
If states cannot go to SC to address issues with other states - then where can states go for such help?
The SC set an awful precedent today: they won’t help states resolve issues among themselves.
SCOTUS said "no standing". In this case, since SCOTUS is the jurisdiction, it means Texas has no injury. This is true, Texas doesn't have an injury (dilution, failure of equal protection) until electors cast votes based on the results of the defendant states' tainted polling of their populace. State legislatures may correct this before those votes are cast.
If they do not, Texas will have injury; and will have standing.
They did not say Texas had no injury. They said Texas does not get to concern itself with how other states run their elections. It was a terrible statement by the freshman justices.