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

Well-known 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
Well, it's official:



Ridiculous. 3 justices would have heard it.


Still Wisconsin election case but I'm not holding hope out.
 

wiscoaster

Well-known member
Any news on the other cases they were supposed to conference on Friday? Did they just kick those cans down the road?
 

wiscoaster

Well-known 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

Well-known 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.
 

wiscoaster

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

roscoe

Well-known 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).
 

tyrant

Member
Looks like it's over. What a travesty.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20210301-134743_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20210301-134743_Chrome.jpg
    783.1 KB · Views: 136

tyrant

Member
No, just postponed.

Now, the country will get to see how bad Biden & the Demos really are, and the MAGA movement will get stronger & more united.


SCOTUS should have granted cert and ruled that what the states did was usurp the right of the legislature and that battle is over.
 

roscoe

Well-known member
SCOTUS should have granted cert and ruled that what the states did was usurp the right of the legislature and that battle is over.

No - they literally couldn't. The US Constitution is clear about the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. If there is fraud in an election run by the states, that falls under the jurisdiction of state courts. Article 2 is explicit about this.

Note that the court literally swatted this case away without even bothering to comment. It was a loser from the start, filed by people who seem not to understand constitutional law.
 
Top