This matter had to be run through the Courts. It doesn't go Invalid Election -> Martial Law. There's a few steps inbetween.

For ordinary pedes, we would end at Court. 'Have our day' as it were.

and they had to be given the chance to have their say. Right, or wrong. Doesn't matter.

Yes. Bounce it through the Courts. Let them have a chance. BEFORE you declare martial law. Most of us end at Courts. But then again, we are not President.

This. I would have comprehended that.

Sadly, no.

I did. I edited the original comment.

Godspeed

It means: 'Bounce it through the Courts before you declare Martial Law because you are the Motherfuckin' President Of The United States, Baby!'

and if you're not, try to resolve it as best you can, before going through court.

Mr. Lawyer who deals in controversy, and tries to make more of it because then he makes more money:

I assure you, responsible men try to resolve their issues amicably, without getting a-turn-on-me's involved. And this is GOOD.

Right to 11, Baby!

In plain language: it's exhausting all your avenues before you bring it before a Court.

However, in this special case the Court is part of that process.

It's a Republic - if you can keep it. Otherwise, it's a _

It means he had to give them a chance.

you and me both, bub.

i felt a tremendous drop in my anxiety today.

yessir. You get it.

Yessir!

And in this very specific case, the step beyond that is the Insurrection Act.

We, normal folks, usually stop at the Courts. Usually...

I tried to reply. I'll edit my post with an addendum if the other reply disappeared.

I can see, from the mixed reactions, the answer is 50/50:

It's an expression that describes having to exhaust your administrative remedies before you take something to trial (to Court). Basically, you did everything you could before pulling out a more severe step. And, that looks good because you did your best to resolve it.

Though specifically, these are now going before the established Courts, it's the same philosophy: before Trump and his supporters take further action, they have to give the existing structures a chance to show their legitimacy and do the right thing.

Sorry bitch, you lied! You don't get to choose whose children those guns get pointed at. Fruit of the tree.

There was a technical reason the Texas claim wasn't accepted, but here's the thing:

Ever hear of 'exhausting your administrative remedy'?

Explanation because the thread blew up and it's clear this wasn't clear to everyone. I was trying to get your noggins to jog:

It's simple: he has to run this through the existing Courts to see if they are going to correct the issue or not. He has to give them a chance. Not unlike if we had a disagreement and I tried to resolve it before running before a Judge to get the Court to intervene. Usually this phrase refers to pre-Court process attempted, but then again, usually I'm not the President in charge of SOCOM.

because then, he tells everyone who is not an american, what's going on.

you should have named it 'rigger'

then it would never tip.

Good point. A number joined the lawsuit who would have joined anyway.

thanks!

oh, but the tip on community styling works much better, because it works on mobile, too!

i deported you accidentally.