Will SCOTUS rule that the states actions in 2020 election were illegal but moot since Biden has been inaugurated?

tyrant

Member
It seems that SCOTUS is going to soon hear whether to take election cases from the 2020 Presidential Election.

The Epoch Times reported that the U.S. Supreme Court announced last Friday that it has scheduled for consideration the election lawsuits filed by Trump for Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, by Mike Kelly, by Lin Wood, Jr. for Georgia, and by Sidney Powell for Michigan during its conference on Feb. 19.

I could see SCOTUS granting cert and ruling on the case saying that what the states did was unconstitutional but since President Biden has been inaugurated that the case is moot.

I'd love for SCOTUS to rule that what the states did was blatantly illegal and unconstitutional and that all of these states need to have re-votes wherein Trump would obviously win and Biden would have to step down to be replaced by Trump as president but I just don't see that happening.
 

Howland937

Active member
It seems that SCOTUS is going to soon hear whether to take election cases from the 2020 Presidential Election.



I could see SCOTUS granting cert and ruling on the case saying that what the states did was unconstitutional but since President Biden has been inaugurated that the case is moot.

I'd love for SCOTUS to rule that what the states did was blatantly illegal and unconstitutional and that all of these states need to have re-votes wherein Trump would obviously win and Biden would have to step down to be replaced by Trump as president but I just don't see that happening.
Toothpaste ain't going back in the tube. If they ruled that it was unconstitutional, unfair, illegal or whatever, the Senate certified the votes as presented them. Biden will continue being president. I don't expect the SCOTUS to rule in Trump's favor in any way no matter the circumstances. Just because they won't want to be that straw.
 

roscoe

Active member
President Biden did not win the election.
He knows it. VP Harris knows it. SCOTUS knows it. President Trump definitely knows it.
It truly does illustrate the depth of the murky Deep Swamp that envelopes our nation.

Incorrect. Trump had 60 court cases to try and demonstrate ANY voter fraud and failed every time. Plus, multiple republican secretaries of state across the US found no fraud. Plus, Biden won by roughly 7 million in the popular vote. Actually I take that back - one instance of voter fraud was found, by a guy in Pennsylvania who voted for Trump twice.

Or are you one of those conspiracy types? Maybe the missing Trump votes are in the basement of Comet Pizza!
 

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
Nonsense.
There is fraud in EVERY election. Usually it is regional and focused on relatively local candidates. National-level fraud usually gets cancelled out by opposing groups in other states.
What scares me is that everyone on one side is swearing that this one lone example is perfect and pristine... .
This is how you destroy people's faith in the electoral system.
 

roscoe

Active member
Nonsense.
There is fraud in EVERY election. Usually it is regional and focused on relatively local candidates. National-level fraud usually gets cancelled out by opposing groups in other states.
What scares me is that everyone on one side is swearing that this one lone example is perfect and pristine... .
This is how you destroy people's faith in the electoral system.
Actually, no one is claiming what you said. They merely said that this one instance is the only one known at this point. Of course there is minor election fraud occasionally that can't be tracked.

But that is not the claim Republicans are making. They claim a conspiracy of large-scale election fraud across multiple states under both Republican and Democratic state administrations. This fraud is specific to the presidential election, not the senatorial or congressional elections that were literally on the same ballots (in most cases the same piece of paper). And they claim that this fraud holds despite multiple recounts under Republican secretaries of state.

But more specifically, this claim was made by Trump as the ballots were literally being counted, and so such claim was made without any evidence. Trump made a similar claim in the 2016 election about the popular vote, also without evidence. I mean, you just have to take it at face value that he is willing to lie to try to avoid losing - it is entirely consistent with his business practices for the last 50 years.

And then we have the Georgia run-off, which was held under incredible scrutiny, and the Republicans lost again.

Sorry, Trump just lost, because he was a poor candidate. It happens. But don't whine about it, people! Square up and try again next time!
 
Last edited:

theotherwaldo

Well-known member
My concern is not for Trump or any of the other politicians.
I'm concerned about the true results of the election.
A large percentage of the folks on all sides are losing faith in the electoral system at the same time that the victorious Democrats are trying to 'fix' the system - using the California model.
Can you imagine a national election using jungle primary rules?
How about automatically people to vote when they apply for public assistance or get a driver's license, whether they are an American citizen or not?
It's like they are treating the U.S. as a defeated enemy nation... .
 

roscoe

Active member
My concern is not for Trump or any of the other politicians.
I'm concerned about the true results of the election.
A large percentage of the folks on all sides are losing faith in the electoral system at the same time that the victorious Democrats are trying to 'fix' the system - using the California model.
Can you imagine a national election using jungle primary rules?
How about automatically people to vote when they apply for public assistance or get a driver's license, whether they are an American citizen or not?
It's like they are treating the U.S. as a defeated enemy nation... .

I am not aware of people losing faith in the electoral system. We had a record turnout this year.

Do you have evidence that foreign nationals are trying to vote? I haven't seen anything that indicates this is a real problem.
 

Howland937

Active member
Screenshot_20210210-190649_Chrome.jpg

I think the fact that several states require no identification to cast a vote, it's easy enough to feel like there are some glaring flaws in the system. In the context of how the majority of those states' electoral votes were cast, it can definitely shake a person's faith in the integrity of the process. Of course that would depend on which way a person leans, though it shouldn't. There's no legitimate reason for a person to not have some form of ID.
 

roscoe

Active member
I think the fact that several states require no identification to cast a vote, it's easy enough to feel like there are some glaring flaws in the system. In the context of how the majority of those states' electoral votes were cast, it can definitely shake a person's faith in the integrity of the process. Of course that would depend on which way a person leans, though it shouldn't. There's no legitimate reason for a person to not have some form of ID.

There was never a rule in any state for ID before 1950. It was part of the Republican effort to limit Black voters' access to the polls that very year in South Carolina.

As long as you register to vote, you have, in effect, already been subject to confirmation of citizenship. All kinds of people don't have ID, for a variety of reasons. That doesn't mean they need give up their constitutional franchise to vote.

Not that it mattered this election - you will notice that Michigan, Georgia, and Arizona require ID. Trump lost those states as well.
 
Last edited:

tyrant

Member
Incorrect. Trump had 60 court cases to try and demonstrate ANY voter fraud and failed every time. Plus, multiple republican secretaries of state across the US found no fraud. Plus, Biden won by roughly 7 million in the popular vote. Actually I take that back - one instance of voter fraud was found, by a guy in Pennsylvania who voted for Trump twice.

Or are you one of those conspiracy types? Maybe the missing Trump votes are in the basement of Comet Pizza!


This is incorrect.


Per Gateway Pundit:

When looking at the number of cases related to the 2020 Presidential election that were decided on merits, there were only 21 cases decided so far. Of these cases, President Trump won 14. The President won 14 of 21 cases decided on merits which is two-thirds of the cases.

The report as of February 4th, 2021 shows:

  • There are 80 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
  • In 28 cases President Trump was/is the plaintiff
  • In 48 cases President Trump was/is not the plaintiff
  • In 4 cases President Trump is the defendant
  • 21 of these cases have been decided on merits
  • Of the 21 cases decided on the merits, President Trump won 14 of them or two-thirds of the cases
  • 25 cases remain active


 

roscoe

Active member
This is incorrect.


Per Gateway Pundit:

When looking at the number of cases related to the 2020 Presidential election that were decided on merits, there were only 21 cases decided so far. Of these cases, President Trump won 14. The President won 14 of 21 cases decided on merits which is two-thirds of the cases.

The report as of February 4th, 2021 shows:

  • There are 80 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
  • In 28 cases President Trump was/is the plaintiff
  • In 48 cases President Trump was/is not the plaintiff
  • In 4 cases President Trump is the defendant
  • 21 of these cases have been decided on merits
  • Of the 21 cases decided on the merits, President Trump won 14 of them or two-thirds of the cases
  • 25 cases remain active



None of those cases you cited relate to overturning election results in contested states, nor to purported election fraud.

Here is better and more relevant count (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-..._the_2020_United_States_presidential_election)

1613030461798.png

Notice that there is not even a column for plaintiff (e.g. Trump) victories, because there were/are none.
 

wiscoaster

Active member
Incorrect. Trump had 60 court cases to try and demonstrate ANY voter fraud and failed every time.
Because in most cases (per your chart above) the case was dropped or the courts refused to take the cases and therefore they did not examine the evidence and gave no ruling for or against. Furthermore, the cases that did result in rulings were more because of plaintiff procedural errors than actual evidence or arguments. Therefore, using the Judicial system as a basis for maintaining the hypothesis of "no fraud" is a leap of faith, not justifiable as fact.
 
Last edited:

Blue Jays

New member
When there are more votes cast for a candidate than even live in the entire voting precinct the whole system is hosed.
Voting machines should have zero internet connectivity. It should have a single plug that goes into wall outlet. That's it.

Voting should be done on one day. Not voting quarter, voting month, or voting week. One SINGLE day.
Upon arrival to cast a vote, your thumbs should be dunked into indelible purple ink to prevent multiple votes.

As it stands...I could drive from town-to-town saying that I am someone else from my small family.
No ID requested. All one needs to do is have the signature look vaguely like earlier example on page.

Absentee ballots should be permitted for military deployments, overseas travel, or significant medical reasons.
The notion of mass-mailing ballots to millions of people (many of which get intercepted) is patent absurd.
 

tyrant

Member
Because in most cases (per your chart above) the case was dropped or the courts refused to take the cases and therefore they did not examine the evidence and gave no ruling for or against. Furthermore, the cases that did result in rulings were more because of plaintiff procedural errors than actual evidence or arguments. Therefore, using the Judicial system as a basis for maintaining the hypothesis of "no fraud" is a leap of faith, not justifiable as fact.


Correct. So many cases were dismissed for lack of standing stating that they waited "too long to file".

Wherein if they had filed before the election the cases would have been dismissed for lack of being able to prove any "harm".


It's a Catch 22. Too early and too late to file......well, when do you file???


When they drop the case based off of standing not the merits and then people say, "Trump lost in court proving his claims are false" is so naive.
 

tyrant

Member
None of those cases you cited relate to overturning election results in contested states, nor to purported election fraud.

Here is better and more relevant count (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-..._the_2020_United_States_presidential_election)

View attachment 1144
Notice that there is not even a column for plaintiff (e.g. Trump) victories, because there were/are none.


The cases that could be granted cert by SCOTUS have enough votes to over-turn the election.


And the current cases before the Supreme Court aren't about election fraud per se, they are about actions taken by election officials that are unconstitutional.


And they are correct.


They passed laws such as expanding mail-in voting without passing through the legislature, putting in the paper, and having 2 hearings as their states constitution states must be done to be legal. It is actually a very strong case for Trump apparently.



 

Howland937

Active member
s long as you register to vote, you have, in effect, already been subject to confirmation of citizenship. All kinds of people don't have ID, for a variety of reasons. That doesn't mean they need give up their constitutional franchise to vote.
I agree that lots of people don't have an ID for various reasons. I'm saying that in today's world, there's no excuse not to have an ID. Can't get a job, cash a check, legally drive, buy tobacco or alcohol (law here requires anyone appearing under the age of 40 to be carded, supposedly) and in a lot of cases, can't turn on utilities. Hell, you can't even get an ID without an ID.

According to the local Sheriff's Dept, a person can be cited for not providing identification upon request during a traffic stop, even if they're not the driver.

I went 3 years with no identification after I got drunk and left it at a bar about 4 hours from home. They wouldn't mail it because they couldn't verify I was in fact, me. It was a headache getting a new one made, and for 3 years I was unable to vote in Ohio.
 
The cases that could be granted cert by SCOTUS have enough votes to over-turn the election.


And the current cases before the Supreme Court aren't about election fraud per se, they are about actions taken by election officials that are unconstitutional.


And they are correct.


They passed laws such as expanding mail-in voting without passing through the legislature, putting in the paper, and having 2 hearings as their states constitution states must be done to be legal. It is actually a very strong case for Trump apparently.



You got a link from anywhere else? Not giving those guys my email
 

tyrant

Member
You got a link from anywhere else? Not giving those guys my email


Actually I looked and could find almost none........Google I think.........crazy, right?


Here's the only other one I could find.



From this article though:


"If the Supreme Court accepts any of the election lawsuits, it is likely that they won't be heard until October."



 
Top