after hans v liousianna (state immune to federal suits file by their own citizens-such immunity is not in constitution) , plessy v fergusson (separate but equal), buck v bell (legalized forced sterilization upon those the state deemed imbeciles [Trust me, the dems would do it to capitalist before we would marxist]), stump v sparkman (qualified immunity given to judge who ordered teen steryized), Bradley v. Fisher (giving judges absolute immunity), nixon v fitzgerald (qualified immunity), Imbler v. Pachtman (granting absolute immunity to prosecutors), sosamon v texas (gives sovereign immunity to states in federal rluipa claims), roe v wade (legalized killing unborn babies), obergfell v hodges (ruled gay marraiges const right), etc (trans rights), etc...This is what makes ppl decide to burn the scotus down as they been ripping away your every const right by giving immunity to all government officials who seek it for their lawless actions?
we need a constitutional amendment forcing SCOTUS hand apparently in cases like this where they want to run away like pussies. Half the country has "standing" here with one state Texas seriously considering seceding and they look the other way. GTFO.
Wonder if the call for the 6th is not only for sign of strength but to let SCOTUS know there's going to be riots regardless of their decision...so make the right decision!
Libtards don't seem to understand the simple fact that we Conservatives own all the guns. Have you noticed that no-one on the right has really hit back yet? The few times some people started pushing back against Antifa they've run like the scared lil pussy bitches they are. Imagine a group of well-armed Patriots who decided to end them. It would be no contest.
Yea like Cher, Mark Zuckerberg, Cornell West and the Koch brothers are going to slug it out on the streets with us. We need a Patrick Henry Style Revolution.
Wait .. you mean the sitting POTUS might have a chance at standing in a US presidential election case???
I am sure they are right now looking for an excuse, like too many marriages to foreigners, orange appearance on some TV channels, wrong middle initial, etc.
Its crazy that they don't touch this with a 10 foot pole. Because they know we have standing and we've requested nothing more than the case be examined fairly in a constitutional court. The powers that be trying to ignore this instead of attack us for it, or just straight up lie shows how much standing and how valid the meticulous patriots that put this together really are. Much Russia and impeachment hoax was ran on hand waving and fumes. We've thousands of data points of evidence and much more coming. We know what was done.
you make a fair point, and one that i think is not actually lost on the court. the trump team was done dirty - we've shown plenty of evidence at this point. so the way things are supposed to work in this country is that you at least deserve your day in court to stand before justice, make your arguments, and receive a judgement whether for or against your case.
we are not asking the supremes to 'change the election' - they may end up doing that if our cause is true and the judges honest - but we are asking them to give is a chance to make our case.
this is the to help provide resolution to a dispute that, without their judgement, threatens to further divide and hasten the end of our country.
i may be naive but i think we still live in a country based on the rule of law, and that the court will be interested in the case
this. do the right thing scotus so there isnt a hot civil war
Hope they understand 🙏
after hans v liousianna (state immune to federal suits file by their own citizens-such immunity is not in constitution) , plessy v fergusson (separate but equal), buck v bell (legalized forced sterilization upon those the state deemed imbeciles [Trust me, the dems would do it to capitalist before we would marxist]), stump v sparkman (qualified immunity given to judge who ordered teen steryized), Bradley v. Fisher (giving judges absolute immunity), nixon v fitzgerald (qualified immunity), Imbler v. Pachtman (granting absolute immunity to prosecutors), sosamon v texas (gives sovereign immunity to states in federal rluipa claims), roe v wade (legalized killing unborn babies), obergfell v hodges (ruled gay marraiges const right), etc (trans rights), etc...This is what makes ppl decide to burn the scotus down as they been ripping away your every const right by giving immunity to all government officials who seek it for their lawless actions?
scotus is betting on the right to stay keyboard warriors, while appeasing the city-burning left.
They'll be in for a shock.
Maybe they think all those Trump rallies where the stadiums are full were just CG.
-Cut to Jan. 6th-
Surprise Snowflakes
we need a constitutional amendment forcing SCOTUS hand apparently in cases like this where they want to run away like pussies. Half the country has "standing" here with one state Texas seriously considering seceding and they look the other way. GTFO.
Wonder if the call for the 6th is not only for sign of strength but to let SCOTUS know there's going to be riots regardless of their decision...so make the right decision!
Like I said before, they could make this "Just" and correct "before" theres blood on the streets...otherwise its on their hands!!!
mutilators of male genitalia?
No you fucking idiot
Who own the guns? Die a patriot rather than live as a traitorous slave
Libtards don't seem to understand the simple fact that we Conservatives own all the guns. Have you noticed that no-one on the right has really hit back yet? The few times some people started pushing back against Antifa they've run like the scared lil pussy bitches they are. Imagine a group of well-armed Patriots who decided to end them. It would be no contest.
The people with really smol hats?
Yea like Cher, Mark Zuckerberg, Cornell West and the Koch brothers are going to slug it out on the streets with us. We need a Patrick Henry Style Revolution.
Can't be denied on standing this time. Don't want to hear any other excuses.
that's where you're wrong, kiddo!
Yep, SCOTUS is compromised.
Standing or no standing, if 7/9ths of SCOTUS dropped the Texas case just because Roberts squealed... Well... Compromised.
I'd like to be wrong though.
what makes you say that it wont be denied because of standing? sorry im not that informed, could you elaborate on that please?
Well seems to me they're suing as an Entity which was harmed.
i agree this feels like it might stick
Wait .. you mean the sitting POTUS might have a chance at standing in a US presidential election case???
I am sure they are right now looking for an excuse, like too many marriages to foreigners, orange appearance on some TV channels, wrong middle initial, etc.
They can deny it because it's past the time that electors met. This would also set a precedent, which the Roberts Court is loathe to do.
Its crazy that they don't touch this with a 10 foot pole. Because they know we have standing and we've requested nothing more than the case be examined fairly in a constitutional court. The powers that be trying to ignore this instead of attack us for it, or just straight up lie shows how much standing and how valid the meticulous patriots that put this together really are. Much Russia and impeachment hoax was ran on hand waving and fumes. We've thousands of data points of evidence and much more coming. We know what was done.
you make a fair point, and one that i think is not actually lost on the court. the trump team was done dirty - we've shown plenty of evidence at this point. so the way things are supposed to work in this country is that you at least deserve your day in court to stand before justice, make your arguments, and receive a judgement whether for or against your case.
we are not asking the supremes to 'change the election' - they may end up doing that if our cause is true and the judges honest - but we are asking them to give is a chance to make our case.
this is the to help provide resolution to a dispute that, without their judgement, threatens to further divide and hasten the end of our country.
i may be naive but i think we still live in a country based on the rule of law, and that the court will be interested in the case