You all keep acting like the Texas case was just some random case that wasn’t part of “The Plan”...except everyone was basically counting on all the local cases to end up in front of the SCOTUS to get a fair trial. And the SCOTUS just told the US to go fuck itself.
So no, the Texas case isn’t some random unplanned thing that didn’t mean anything. It was our proof that not even our highest most respected court in our country is willing do anything about the blatant election fraud.
Agreed. As important as it is to keep our hopes up, it’s actually just as important to keep our feet on the ground and value truth over blind optimism.
The Texas case got rejected on standing, all that means is a suit that does have standing needs to make it to SCOTUS. I know people think of standing as a technicality but it's incredibly important and SCOTUS can't make an exception "this one time" because that sets precedent.
So what remedy can a state seek when another state's unconstitutional actions negatively affect their own legal processes? This is not only directly a horrible decision but it likely sets a terrible precedent.
Texas received no injury from whatever the four defendant states did. Generalized grievances like "but the president is not going to be the one I wanted" don't count, if that counted literally every Republican in the country would have standing to sue. That's simply not how standing works.
Trump, the state legislatures in those four states, and possibly the Republican electors have standing. Texas doesn't.
You all keep acting like the Texas case was just some random case that wasn’t part of “The Plan”...except everyone was basically counting on all the local cases to end up in front of the SCOTUS to get a fair trial. And the SCOTUS just told the US to go fuck itself.
So no, the Texas case isn’t some random unplanned thing that didn’t mean anything. It was our proof that not even our highest most respected court in our country is willing do anything about the blatant election fraud.
Agreed. As important as it is to keep our hopes up, it’s actually just as important to keep our feet on the ground and value truth over blind optimism.
The Texas case got rejected on standing, all that means is a suit that does have standing needs to make it to SCOTUS. I know people think of standing as a technicality but it's incredibly important and SCOTUS can't make an exception "this one time" because that sets precedent.
So what remedy can a state seek when another state's unconstitutional actions negatively affect their own legal processes? This is not only directly a horrible decision but it likely sets a terrible precedent.
Texas received no injury from whatever the four defendant states did. Generalized grievances like "but the president is not going to be the one I wanted" don't count, if that counted literally every Republican in the country would have standing to sue. That's simply not how standing works.
Trump, the state legislatures in those four states, and possibly the Republican electors have standing. Texas doesn't.