The argument that it's too late to hear the case when the week before you said it was too early is spurious at best. Thomas nailed it when he said the actions of the court on this only furthers the mistrust of the election system by the citizens.
It's clear they cared more for their reputation and appearing "impartial" but really they only appear that way to a minority of voters now. To every one else it makes them seem cowardly or partisan.
Hummm... I always wondered what the Staute of Limitations was for Steeling the office of The POTUS. Is is much shorter time period that one would expect.
Roe v Wade set a precedent for "moot" cases where the issue was one of timeliness and something that could be expected to pass before the court could rule on it. These cases should still be heard.
Trump should be calling for an amendment abolishing the Supreme Court as being useless for abandoning their sacred duties. It wouldn't happen, but it would shame both the court and the current people in office, as well as drain public support for them.
Standing = someone who is directly impacted. So an individual is hit by a bus and lives, he has standing, or if he dies; his family.
Moot=It’s irrelevant
Latches= Literally lazy or too late. As in you waited when you should have sued.
Back too the man hit by the bus, most states have a specified time in which a case has to be brought. 10 years in some cases, so you wait until 15 years and sue, the judge will say latches outside of some extreme circumstances. For instance, minors who have been harmed as a youth have the ability too sue past a timeline.
With these cases they set a precedent- basically fuck off we don’t care, whatever a state court says goes. Basically setup theft for life.
But standing doesn't have to do with when the case was filed, does it? Trying to learn here.
Correct. Standing is legitimacy to raise the case. so, to rephrase my comment-
Before inauguration: "You have no right to raise this case, because it doesnt affect you"
After inauguration: "This already happened so we're not going to look at it".
The argument that it's too late to hear the case when the week before you said it was too early is spurious at best. Thomas nailed it when he said the actions of the court on this only furthers the mistrust of the election system by the citizens.
It's clear they cared more for their reputation and appearing "impartial" but really they only appear that way to a minority of voters now. To every one else it makes them seem cowardly or partisan.
SCOTUS is worse than the Broward Crowards who hid during the Parkland school shooting.
They are trying to provoke MAGA by telling them they are "down to their last box"
Hummm... I always wondered what the Staute of Limitations was for Steeling the office of The POTUS. Is is much shorter time period that one would expect.
Lawyers can’t be trusted whether sharks in congress or sharks in SCOTUS! Black robes make lawyers WORSE not better!
Roe v Wade set a precedent for "moot" cases where the issue was one of timeliness and something that could be expected to pass before the court could rule on it. These cases should still be heard.
Trump should be calling for an amendment abolishing the Supreme Court as being useless for abandoning their sacred duties. It wouldn't happen, but it would shame both the court and the current people in office, as well as drain public support for them.
FDR destroyed the Supreme Court and Checks and balances a long time ago.
FDR destroyed federalism primarily......come one come all suck on the DC gubbamint tit.
FDR sucked! We sided with the commies.
Thank you - the no standing argument was peak bullshit. As if Texas isn't impacted by who is president?
Standing = someone who is directly impacted. So an individual is hit by a bus and lives, he has standing, or if he dies; his family. Moot=It’s irrelevant Latches= Literally lazy or too late. As in you waited when you should have sued.
Back too the man hit by the bus, most states have a specified time in which a case has to be brought. 10 years in some cases, so you wait until 15 years and sue, the judge will say latches outside of some extreme circumstances. For instance, minors who have been harmed as a youth have the ability too sue past a timeline.
With these cases they set a precedent- basically fuck off we don’t care, whatever a state court says goes. Basically setup theft for life.