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

tyrant

Member
Just because it breaks the law does not mean it has any traction with SCOTUS. It has to relate to the US Constitution or federal law. I just don't know how that applies here. These are all state laws you are talking about.

Anyway, what are the actual cases - does anybody know?


Not sure that's how this works.

The Constitution gives the state legislatures the power to make election laws. If the states violated those laws they violated the Constitution.

Also I am not a lawyer, so who knows.
 

roscoe

Active member
The Constitution gives the state legislatures the power to make election laws. If the states violated those laws they violated the Constitution.

Unfortunately, that is not how it works. The US Constitution doesn't really give the states the power to make laws, in general. Instead, it outlines the boundaries of federal power, (and the ways it manifests itself into three branches), and then simply says that whatever power is not specifically enumerated for the federal government in the Constitution lies with the states. In a way, the delineation of state power is negative: it is everything not in the US Constitution. So breaking state laws laws is not violating the Constitution, because the Constitution is mute on state affairs.

As for presidential election laws - this is from Article I, Clause 2: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the (state) Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors".

And that's pretty much it. It is up to the states.
 
Last edited:

tyrant

Member

wiscoaster

Active member
It is rather disappointing that Barrett didn't join the dissenters, but then, if she had, the Court would have granted cert. It takes four Justices to hear the case. I'd really like to know where she stands. Apparently she didn't feel strong enough to stick her neck out.
 

roscoe

Active member
Ridiculous. 3 justices would have heard it.


Still Wisconsin election case but I'm not holding hope out.
Nope.
Without comment, the U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it would not review a 4-3 decision against Trump by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The majority in that ruling found one of Trump's challenges to Wisconsin's results was without merit and his others were brought far too late to be considered by the state justices.
 

roscoe

Active member
There's another case against Wisconsin that's still in play - docket #20-883 - scheduled for conference on March 5.

Interesting. They are making an equal protection clause claim in that case, which is normally only brought if someone is denied the right to vote. I am not sure that there will be much traction to for the argument that people should be denied the right to have their votes counted, simply because they voted by absentee ballot during a pandemic.

I would be surprised to see this go very far. The motion to expedite consideration (filed prior to Biden's inauguration) was already denied, so they didn't see enough in in to make it count. And, of course, it is an appeal, the case already having been dismissed by Trump-appointee judges at the federal District and Circuit levels (unanimously).
 
Top