But the SC by avoiding one Pandora's box has inadvertently potentially opened another. States that will have disputes will be wary to go to the SC from this point forward.
I don't know that that is true, this isn't the first dispute between states that's been denied, it's just the first of this kind. The SC will remain the only choice they have. In 1876 Democrats beat the shit out of black voters to make sure Tilden won. The states didn't sue one another to enforce their laws, instead it was a brokered deal in Congress to decide what electors to reject. There are lots of similarities with this election.
I agree this situation is unique and that maybe SC didn't want to open Pandora's Box but have opened another can of worms.
Disputes between multiple states regarding pollution for example isn't new. If State A violates the Clean Air Act other States should have the right to sue State A even if they are not the injured party or a neighboring state to the polluting State A.
That is true.
But the SC by avoiding one Pandora's box has inadvertently potentially opened another. States that will have disputes will be wary to go to the SC from this point forward.
I don't know that that is true, this isn't the first dispute between states that's been denied, it's just the first of this kind. The SC will remain the only choice they have. In 1876 Democrats beat the shit out of black voters to make sure Tilden won. The states didn't sue one another to enforce their laws, instead it was a brokered deal in Congress to decide what electors to reject. There are lots of similarities with this election.
I agree this situation is unique and that maybe SC didn't want to open Pandora's Box but have opened another can of worms.
Disputes between multiple states regarding pollution for example isn't new. If State A violates the Clean Air Act other States should have the right to sue State A even if they are not the injured party or a neighboring state to the polluting State A.