GOP v. Boockvar has gone to conference of Jan 22 (they keep moving it, first Jan 8, then 15, now 22) (the segregated ballot case)--i..e SCOTUS will decide whether to hear it in the conference Docket 20-542/20-574. Trump v. Boockvar 20-845 (appeal of three early losses on election law changes at PA Supreme Court), response due Jan 22; **Trump v. Biden **20-882 (Wisconsin recount case, appeal of 4-3 loss at WI Supreme Court on illegally cast ballots) has just been docketed, motion to expedite denied Jan 11); Ward v. Jackson 20-809 (Kelli Ward AZ case on sample of ballots) briefing continuing but motion to expedite denied) Kelly and Parnell v PA 20-810 (Act 77 case), response due Jan 14. In Georgia: Astonishingly, given how sure they were that dead people voted, etc. in Trump v. Raffensberger Trump just settled with Raffensberger on condition that they sit down and compare their figures with GA's figures on illegal votes, as offered in the leaked call. (See https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2021.01.07-Notice-of-Voluntary-Dismissal-KH628899x9D7F4.pdf
Giuliani's michigan case died on the vine (no standing, plus he was not allowed to file an amended complaint). The 2000 affidavits (I think it was actually about 200) were throughout all the cases filed by Trump or Trump allies, like Giuliani, Sydney Powell, Lin Wood, other organizations.
GOP v. Boockvar has gone to conference of Jan 15 (the segregated ballot case)--i..e SCOTUS will decide whether to hear it in the conference Docket 20-542/20-574. Trump v. Boockvar 20-845 (appeal of three early losses on election law changes at PA Supreme Court), response due Jan 22; **Trump v. Biden **20-882 (Wisconsin recount case, appeal of 4-3 loss at WI Supreme Court on illegally cast ballots) has just been docketed, motion to expedite denied Jan 11); Ward v. Jackson 20-809 (Kelli Ward AZ case on sample of ballots) briefing continuing but motion to expedite denied) Kelly and Parnell v PA 20-810 (Act 77 case), response due Jan 14. In Georgia: Astonishingly, given how sure they were that dead people voted, etc. in Trump v. Raffensberger Trump just settled with Raffensberger on condition that they sit down and compare their figures with GA's figures on illegal votes, as offered in the leaked call. (See https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2021.01.07-Notice-of-Voluntary-Dismissal-KH628899x9D7F4.pdf
They are all reasonably strong (except for Kelli v. Jackson). The ones from PA are about changes to elections procedures re absentee ballots not passed by the state legislature, and therefore unconstitutional. Dershowitz says this is a winning argument and Alito granted some interim relief early on--such as ordering the ballots segregated, which he would not have done if the argument didn't have any merit. In the Wisconsin one (illegal cast absentee votes) Trump lost narrowly 4-3 in the court below, so he convinced 3 judges in the court below of the correctness of his legal position so that could be a strong one also. As for the ultimate outcome, it might be that SCOTUS being more conservative now and not being put on the spot to seemingly "overturn" an election will at least agree to hear the cases and maybe rule in Trump's favor for "next time". So they could vindicate him and address election integrity concerns to some extent if they wanted to. Or they could just leave this whole thing as a festering sore.
the election cases are simply at the cert stage and the briefing isn't over yet (i.e. they haven't even been sent to conference yet to decide whether the court will hear them). Below is a recap:
GOP v. Boockvar has gone to conference of Jan 15 (the segregated ballot case)--i..e SCOTUS will decide whether to hear it in the conference Docket 20-542/20-574. Trump v. Boockvar 20-845 (appeal of three early losses on election law changes at PA Supreme Court), response due Jan 22; **Trump v. Biden **20-882 (Wisconsin recount case, appeal of 4-3 loss at WI Supreme Court on illegally cast ballots) has just been docketed, motion to expedite denied Jan 11); Ward v. Jackson 20-809 (Kelli Ward AZ case on sample of ballots) briefing continuing but motion to expedite denied) Kelly and Parnell v PA 20-810 (Act 77 case), response due Jan 14. In Georgia: Astonishingly, given how sure they were that dead people voted, etc. in Trump v. Raffensberger Trump just settled with Raffensberger on condition that they sit down and compare their figures with GA's figures on illegal votes, as offered in the leaked call. (See https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2021.01.07-Notice-of-Voluntary-Dismissal-KH628899x9D7F4.pdf
If anyone is interested GOP v. Boockvar has gone to conference of Jan 15 (the segregated ballot case)--i..e SCOTUS will decide whether to hear it in the conference Docket 20-542/20-574. Trump v. Boockvar 20-845 (appeal of three early losses on election law changes at PA Supreme Court), response due Jan 22; Trump v. Biden 20-882 (Wisconsin recount case, appeal of 4-3 loss at WI Supreme Court on illegally cast ballots) has just been docketed, motion to expedite denied Jan 11); Ward v. Jackson 20-809 (Kelli Ward AZ case on sample of ballots) briefing continuing but motion to expedite denied) Kelly and Parnell v PA 20-810 (Act 77 case), response due Jan 14. In Georgia: Astonishingly, given how sure they were that dead people voted, etc. in Trump v. Raffensberger Trump just settled with Raffensberger on condition that they sit down and compare their figures with GA's figures on illegal votes, as offered in the leaked call. (See https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2021.01.07-Notice-of-Voluntary-Dismissal-KH628899x9D7F4.pdf
Wisconsin Supreme Court not SCOTUS. A somewhat helpful case about indefinitely confined absentee ballots needing ID to be valid. However, team Trump lost the recount case in Wisconsin Supreme Court also today 4-3. Not sure if they can appeal.
Two different decisions to day from WI Supreme Court. Read them both here https://www.wicourts.gov/supreme/scopin.jsp?begin_date=12/14/2020&end_date=12/14/2020&SortBy=date
He did. there are two different suits, read them both here https://www.wicourts.gov/supreme/scopin.jsp?begin_date=12/14/2020&end_date=12/14/2020&SortBy=date
Read the two different cases here: https://www.wicourts.gov/supreme/scopin.jsp?begin_date=12/14/2020&end_date=12/14/2020&SortBy=date
she lost in all these cases in the US district court ,and she's trying to skip the Circuit Court of Appeals and go straight to the SCOTUS. But I believe (except for the Wisconsin one) the District Courts had simply ruled to dismiss the cases not on the merits, but because of standing etc. So the underlying cases are not trials on the merits so all the SCOTUS could do anyway is send it back to the district court to reconsider its summary dismissal and hear the case on the merits. The Wisconsin one was dismissed on the merits yesterday, but she still thinks she has grounds to skip the Circuit Court of Appeals and go straight to SCOTUS.
Yes, it helps that it was decided on the merits, because now the SCOTUS can also rule on the merits. Here is the decision: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2020-12-12-Decision-And-Order-dckt-134_0.pdf
the thing is that in all these cases, there was no decision on the merits at the lower courts. They are going up as appeals of negative rulings on motions to dismiss (based largely on lack of standing, frivolous claims, no federal jurisdiction). Thus the only remedy SCOTUS could give would be to send it back to the district court to hear the case on the merits. Plus Sydney is taking the unusual step of skipping the Circuit Court of Appeals and going directly to SCOTUS, which she says can do but not sure about that.
All this means is that the defendant' s brief is due today.