From the same source:
The general grounds for an objection to the counting of an electoral vote or votes would appear from the federal statute and from historical sources to be that such vote was not “regularly given” by an elector, and/or that the elector was not “lawfully certified” according to state statutory procedures.
Are you a lawyer? A shill? You do not have a clue what the Federalist Society is.
This is from December 3!
deleted my own comment
lawyer here. I presume these legislators are trying (not sure whether sincerely) to get the PA legislature to vote, under US Const. Art. 2, to abrogate (ignore or rescind) Pennsylvania's existing law that defines who the presidential electors are, and replace it with a new "law" that says "Never mind what the law says. We are going to appoint a different slate of electors because of all the fraud."
I talked to my Michigan legislators about doing the same thing. Nobody even seriously considered it.
I give it a 2% chance of passing.
Already done. Judge in Antrim County allowed experts to image the hard drives and USB sticks, but has imposed a protective order prohibiting disclosure.
Welcome! All you say is true, which is abbreviated here as "life before the red pill." Once you've seen the truth it's almost impossible to go back and pretend.
I think Michigan's AG argued 1) Michigan law prohibits private parties from inspecting voting machines and their tallies, let alone disclosing vote tallies on the machines, except in strict accordance with state law and 2) disclosing machine data would be a breach of the State's contract with Dominion.
Total BS, but it's the easier path for a lower court judge -- less risky personally to let the appeals court break the hornet nest.
I bet a fractured opinion.
(3) Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer: DISMISS, Texas lacks any standing whatsoever to bring a suit complaining about other states' election procedures. Mind your own business.
(4) Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Coney-Barret: the defendant states messed up so bad it threatens to undermine the union compact -- really the bedrock purpose of our Constitution (which we fought a civil war over). We do not decide this election, but hereby nullify the electors' appointment in these four states and send the case back to those state's legislatures to fix.
(2) Gorsuch & Roberts: look for separate opinions effectively adopting one of the two results above but without the black & white reasoning. If we do get five votes, at least one opinion will have all kinds of weasel words so that this case isn't used to expand federal jurisdiction in state election cases.
Proud of her!
This will not age well!
Would have more impact if the Pennsylvania legislature moved to intervene. Filing an amicus brief is little more than virtue signaling. It pacifies the base (sorry fellow pedes) but requires no commitment from the filer.
I've already prayed for you. You're hurting and I'm sorry.
Plenty of good advice here, some bad. Mine:
-
turn to God, even (especially) when you feel like turning away. Maybe join a small group at your church, or find a chill Bible study group. We have a few Catholics in our group and nobody asks them to convert or anything. Sometimes we just drink a few beers and talk about life.
-
Don't focus on yourself. This is harder for introverts, so you have to be intentional about it. But partying, getting laid, porn, excessive working out, focus on money, even late nights of home improvement -- I don't think these will work for you very well. Instead ask God to lead you to an activity where you can help others. Maybe charity or volunteer work. Maybe it's helping a member of your family, maybe it's being a mentor for a neighbor kid. It's not "cool" to serve others, but it's often a great path out of depression. I loved the pede's advice who said write down your specific prayers. He/she is right.
Good luck and God bless.
I looked this up yesterday. If Biden disqualifies himself (withdraws) after the electoral college meets but prior to his inauguration, the VP "elected" by the electoral college is automatically the next in line to assume presidency.
Ohio does not support Texas's request for relief:
Precisely because Ohio holds this view about the meaning of the Electors Clause, it cannot support Texas’s plea for relief. Texas seeks a “remand to the State legislatures to allocate electors in a manner consistent with the Constitution.” ... Such an order would violate, not honor, the Electors Clause. Federal courts, just like state courts, lack authority to change the legislatively chosen method for appointing presidential electors. And so federal courts, just like state courts, lack authority to order legislatures to appoint electors without regard to the results of an already-completed election. What is more, the relief that Texas seeks would undermine a foundational premise of our federalist system: the idea that the States are sovereigns, free to govern themselves. The federal government has only those powers that the Constitution gives to it. And nothing in the Constitution empowers courts to issue orders affirmatively directing the States how to exercise their constitutional authority. .... The courts have no more business ordering the People’s representatives how to choose electors than they do ordering the People themselves how to choose their dinners.
I cancelled my WSJ subscription after nearly 30 years.
Yep. You can vote perfectly blank ballots.
She's going to vote an entire stack of blank ballots?
Anybody else have horrible video lag? I'm on RSBNetwork.com
I'm a litigator and have read the arguments closely. My current take: odds of SCOTUS grantingTexas real and timely relief is 1 in 3. An uphill battle but certainly not a "frivolous case" as NPR reported this morning.
Love how the puzzle pieces are falling together.
A footnote indicates it's a roll call vote.
the link is https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL32717/12