Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   US Supreme Court will hear appeal of pro-Trump PA election lawsuit too late for it to make a difference in deciding the election's result   (washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Supreme Court of the United States, Samuel Alito, Democratic Party, New Jersey, President of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court, George W. Bush, John G. Roberts  
•       •       •

2321 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Dec 2020 at 1:04 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



72 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-12-04 11:11:55 AM  
They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.
 
2020-12-04 11:12:42 AM  
Did SCOTUS actually grant Certiorari? Or is Alito assigned to that Federal Circuit and he put in the deadline for the stuff to support the Motion to Grant Certiorari?
 
2020-12-04 11:28:28 AM  

Unobtanium: Did SCOTUS actually grant Certiorari? Or is Alito assigned to that Federal Circuit and he put in the deadline for the stuff to support the Motion to Grant Certiorari?


Alito told the defendants they needed to respond to the complaint by Dec 9.  So, it isn't taking on the case per se.  He is asking the defendants their position on the merits of the complaint.  Then he would decide if SCOTUS would reject it or ask for a certiorari vote.  But Dec 8 is legally mandated as the date that certifications are deemed safe from interference.  If there is a certification by a state on Dec 8, it is de facto untouchable.  Pennsylvania has a certification already.  By placing the response date after the date it can be changed, Alito told Trump to fark right off without actually doing anything the MAGAts could turn on Alito for, ie an outright dismissal.
 
2020-12-04 11:40:45 AM  
I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.
 
2020-12-04 12:11:30 PM  

NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.


That isn't how Chief Justice works.  It is a specific one of the justices.  When the position becomes vacant, the next person whom POTUS appoints and the Senate confirms becomes Chief Justice, even if they haven't been on SCOTUS before. Five Justices have become Chief Justice after being an associate Justice.  But they had to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate to that new position.  Effectively, they lost their old position on SCOTUS and got another one, that of Chief Justice.  And then POTUS had to appoint another judge to take their original position.  No Democratic POTUS would ever appoint Barrett to Chief Justice.  And no Republican POTUS not named Trump would appoint her either.  She's a raving dipshiat.  No one would want her to be the face of SCOTUS.  The Republicans would find a new judge to be Chief Justice.  Even if they waned to appoint a Republican woman as Chef Justice, they would find a new one who wouldn't show up to the official SCOTUS class photo in Aunt Lydia cosplay.
 
2020-12-04 12:12:59 PM  

NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.


Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?
 
2020-12-04 12:30:48 PM  

phalamir: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

That isn't how Chief Justice works.  It is a specific one of the justices.  When the position becomes vacant, the next person whom POTUS appoints and the Senate confirms becomes Chief Justice, even if they haven't been on SCOTUS before. Five Justices have become Chief Justice after being an associate Justice.  But they had to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate to that new position.  Effectively, they lost their old position on SCOTUS and got another one, that of Chief Justice.  And then POTUS had to appoint another judge to take their original position.  No Democratic POTUS would ever appoint Barrett to Chief Justice.  And no Republican POTUS not named Trump would appoint her either.  She's a raving dipshiat.  No one would want her to be the face of SCOTUS.  The Republicans would find a new judge to be Chief Justice.  Even if they waned to appoint a Republican woman as Chef Justice, they would find a new one who wouldn't show up to the official SCOTUS class photo in Aunt Lydia cosplay.


I get you on all of that... 100%... By Shadow Chief... I meant leading around Alito/Rapey/Coke Pubes/Hobby Lobby around while Roberts is going to side with the Dems for a lot of this stuff.
 
2020-12-04 12:38:48 PM  
It seems the Court is making its intention to stay out of this clear by slow-walking it.
 
2020-12-04 1:09:47 PM  
I, for one, foresee some frenzied calls from Trump to his SCOTUS picks sometime next week.
 
2020-12-04 1:10:30 PM  

Notabunny: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?


Cute, but moot point. (Watch the new ep.)
 
2020-12-04 1:11:14 PM  
Frank Zappa - Drowning Witch
Youtube 1HJp-rHZOhQ
 
2020-12-04 1:11:54 PM  

Notabunny: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?


Aaaaand my anxiety meter just maxed out again.  Thanks for making me worry again, you jerk!
 
2020-12-04 1:13:14 PM  

mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.


Don't forget the double top secret special ops raid on a German server farm in violation of several international laws and treaties.
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-12-04 1:14:29 PM  

emersonbiggins: I, for one, foresee some frenzied calls from Trump to his SCOTUS picks sometime next week.


And they'll probably go about as well as his call to Doug Ducey during the Arizona certification ceremony.
 
2020-12-04 1:15:09 PM  

phalamir: Unobtanium: Did SCOTUS actually grant Certiorari? Or is Alito assigned to that Federal Circuit and he put in the deadline for the stuff to support the Motion to Grant Certiorari?

Alito told the defendants they needed to respond to the complaint by Dec 9.  So, it isn't taking on the case per se.  He is asking the defendants their position on the merits of the complaint.  Then he would decide if SCOTUS would reject it or ask for a certiorari vote.  But Dec 8 is legally mandated as the date that certifications are deemed safe from interference.  If there is a certification by a state on Dec 8, it is de facto untouchable.  Pennsylvania has a certification already.  By placing the response date after the date it can be changed, Alito told Trump to fark right off without actually doing anything the MAGAts could turn on Alito for, ie an outright dismissal.


And the real nice twist is that trump has used the legal system to stall out until the results don't matter, for as long as he has drawn breath. So Alito doing this is an extra FU to Trump and his games.

/ She is truly a master of irony.
 
2020-12-04 1:15:30 PM  

Notabunny: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?


You can rest assured that the Razor Crest doesn't get captured in this week's episode.
 
2020-12-04 1:16:40 PM  

emersonbiggins: I, for one, foresee some frenzied calls from Trump to his SCOTUS picks sometime next week.


And I forsee three different versions of "Fark you, I got mine" in response.
 
2020-12-04 1:17:02 PM  

BeerArtist: Notabunny: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?

You can rest assured that the Razor Crest doesn't get captured in this week's episode.


But what about next week? WHAT ABOUT NEXT WEEK, SIR?
 
2020-12-04 1:17:06 PM  
Lol you know that date was picked deliberately as a big FU.  It was saying 'even if we agree to hear, and even if we agree with you we don't want it to help you'.
 
2020-12-04 1:17:31 PM  
Aside from SCOTUS making the case moot with the responding deadlines...

Doesn't the PA constitution item in question say, efficiency:

"The government must allow and provide for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

Not:

"The government may only allow for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

I'm not a lawyer, but seems the first option doesn't make it unconstitutional for the PA government to provide absentee voting for additional classes of people.
 
2020-12-04 1:18:01 PM  
If this election ever got overturned...RUN

Take your family and go as far away as you can like the apocalypse is upon us, because it will be

People will die
 
2020-12-04 1:18:21 PM  
Trump campaign:

Fark user imageView Full Size


SCOTUS:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-04 1:18:47 PM  
Will they try to use the Dec 9 court date to claim lack of due process or something even stupider?
 
2020-12-04 1:19:10 PM  
So SCOTUS is saying "nope" loud and clear without ever having to actually say it.

I don't like SCOTUS playing political games like this. I wonder how the other judges feel about Alito throwing SCOTUS to Cult45 as red meat while also politicizing the court in the eyes of the rest of the country. I can't imagine it's good.
 
2020-12-04 1:19:54 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-04 1:20:27 PM  

Notabunny: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

Here's what kept me up last night: Anyone who simply stands up and walks away from a TIE crash is a badass who wont quit. Is Moff Gideon going to capture the Razor Crest before Din and Grogu can get to the Temple on Tython?


I'm pretty sure they'll make it to Tython. Making it off of Tython will be the trick.
 
2020-12-04 1:20:45 PM  
Article II. Section 1.

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."

As long as the state in question has laws specifying voting by mail, then I don't understand the argument that it is unconstitutional.  The process for selecting the electors could be laying out a grid in a field and letting a cow poop, as long as that is how the state legislature decided.
 
2020-12-04 1:21:02 PM  

phalamir: Unobtanium: Did SCOTUS actually grant Certiorari? Or is Alito assigned to that Federal Circuit and he put in the deadline for the stuff to support the Motion to Grant Certiorari?

Alito told the defendants they needed to respond to the complaint by Dec 9.  So, it isn't taking on the case per se.  He is asking the defendants their position on the merits of the complaint.  Then he would decide if SCOTUS would reject it or ask for a certiorari vote.  But Dec 8 is legally mandated as the date that certifications are deemed safe from interference.  If there is a certification by a state on Dec 8, it is de facto untouchable.  Pennsylvania has a certification already.  By placing the response date after the date it can be changed, Alito told Trump to fark right off without actually doing anything the MAGAts could turn on Alito for, ie an outright dismissal.


Well that's sly & clever of Mr. Alito.

/And no....I'm not being sarcastic.
 
2020-12-04 1:23:03 PM  

Target Builder: Aside from SCOTUS making the case moot with the responding deadlines...

Doesn't the PA constitution item in question say, efficiency:

"The government must allow and provide for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

Not:

"The government may only allow for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

I'm not a lawyer, but seems the first option doesn't make it unconstitutional for the PA government to provide absentee voting for additional classes of people.


Congrats, you have better reading comprehension than the elected official.
 
2020-12-04 1:23:52 PM  

mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.


Are you being sarcastic or is that the actual filing?  It's so hard to tell these days...
 
2020-12-04 1:25:24 PM  
Sorry Trump, they already got theirs and you have no leverage any more.  It was a really stupid strategic move for you to sign off on a Justice before the election when he could have used it as a ploy to scare anti-choice tyrants into voting for him.  I thought you were a genius?
 
2020-12-04 1:25:28 PM  

AxL sANe: mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.

Are you being sarcastic or is that the actual filing?  It's so hard to tell these days...


That was a pretty good synthesis of the conspiracy theories and some of the Kraken filings.
 
2020-12-04 1:26:04 PM  

phalamir: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

That isn't how Chief Justice works.  It is a specific one of the justices.  When the position becomes vacant, the next person whom POTUS appoints and the Senate confirms becomes Chief Justice, even if they haven't been on SCOTUS before. Five Justices have become Chief Justice after being an associate Justice.  But they had to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate to that new position.  Effectively, they lost their old position on SCOTUS and got another one, that of Chief Justice.  And then POTUS had to appoint another judge to take their original position.  No Democratic POTUS would ever appoint Barrett to Chief Justice.  And no Republican POTUS not named Trump would appoint her either.  She's a raving dipshiat.  No one would want her to be the face of SCOTUS.  The Republicans would find a new judge to be Chief Justice.  Even if they waned to appoint a Republican woman as Chef Justice, they would find a new one who wouldn't show up to the official SCOTUS class photo in Aunt Lydia cosplay.


You have way more faith in the Republican party than I do. Every Republican President since Nixon has been dumber and more corrupt than the previous one.
 
2020-12-04 1:26:22 PM  

NewportBarGuy: phalamir: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

That isn't how Chief Justice works.  It is a specific one of the justices.  When the position becomes vacant, the next person whom POTUS appoints and the Senate confirms becomes Chief Justice, even if they haven't been on SCOTUS before. Five Justices have become Chief Justice after being an associate Justice.  But they had to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate to that new position.  Effectively, they lost their old position on SCOTUS and got another one, that of Chief Justice.  And then POTUS had to appoint another judge to take their original position.  No Democratic POTUS would ever appoint Barrett to Chief Justice.  And no Republican POTUS not named Trump would appoint her either.  She's a raving dipshiat.  No one would want her to be the face of SCOTUS.  The Republicans would find a new judge to be Chief Justice.  Even if they waned to appoint a Republican woman as Chef Justice, they would find a new one who wouldn't show up to the official SCOTUS class photo in Aunt Lydia cosplay.

I get you on all of that... 100%... By Shadow Chief... I meant leading around Alito/Rapey/Coke Pubes/Hobby Lobby around while Roberts is going to side with the Dems for a lot of this stuff.


She will talk to her husband and either ask for his permission to talk to them or he will talk to them in her place, and then tell her what to do.
 
2020-12-04 1:29:01 PM  

AxL sANe: mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.

Are you being sarcastic or is that the actual filing?  It's so hard to tell these days...


These were all claims made by Trump and company.  Trump even tweeted about the 47 USB drives.   They don't say "zombie" Chavez but the do suggest actions by Chavez after his death.  Could be a vampire.

The sharpies were definitely a thing as were all the other issues I raised including the sanctuary cities.  There are more connections still.  China and Spain are also implicated.
 
2020-12-04 1:30:32 PM  

Professor_Doctor: AxL sANe: mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.

Are you being sarcastic or is that the actual filing?  It's so hard to tell these days...

That was a pretty good synthesis of the conspiracy theories and some of the Kraken filings.


I left out some stuff.  Don't forget the voters wearing rhinestones.  That's sketchy as f$ck.
 
2020-12-04 1:32:31 PM  
If I didn't know better I'd say that SCOTUS agreed to take this case so that the lower courts won't have to be bothered by this nonsense anymore.

I wonder how Trump will react when Gorsuch, Beer Me and Crazy Cat Lady tell his attorneys to knock it the fark off?
 
2020-12-04 1:33:02 PM  
Well, this isn't as good as denying cert, but I'll take it.  The justices were too chicken to fire a shot across Trump's bow, so I guess they decided to throw an egg instead.

phalamir: By placing the response date after the date it can be changed, Alito told Trump to fark right off without actually doing anything the MAGAts could turn on Alito for, ie an outright dismissal.


The MAGAts can also blame the people who brought the suit for filing it too late.  Which they did, BTW; it took them something like three weeks to come up with their harebrained legal theory that mail-in voting was "unconstitutional" in PA.
 
2020-12-04 1:33:29 PM  

Professor_Doctor: Target Builder: Aside from SCOTUS making the case moot with the responding deadlines...

Doesn't the PA constitution item in question say, efficiency:

"The government must allow and provide for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

Not:

"The government may only allow for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

I'm not a lawyer, but seems the first option doesn't make it unconstitutional for the PA government to provide absentee voting for additional classes of people.

Congrats, you have better reading comprehension than the elected official.


They know and comprehend what it says, they're just willing to be intellectually dishonest to get what they want.
 
2020-12-04 1:34:14 PM  

mrshowrules: Professor_Doctor: AxL sANe: mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.

Are you being sarcastic or is that the actual filing?  It's so hard to tell these days...

That was a pretty good synthesis of the conspiracy theories and some of the Kraken filings.

I left out some stuff.  Don't forget the voters wearing rhinestones.  That's sketchy as f$ck.


And the hundreds of Xeroxed military votes.
 
2020-12-04 1:35:32 PM  

emersonbiggins: I, for one, foresee some frenzied calls from Trump to his SCOTUS picks sometime next week.


I see none of them picking up the phone they don't owe him shiat and they know it.
 
2020-12-04 1:36:07 PM  

Tyrone Slothrop: phalamir: NewportBarGuy: I'm wondering... is Amy Clownshoes Barrett the Shadow Chief Justice at this point? Because that thought terrifies me.

That isn't how Chief Justice works.  It is a specific one of the justices.  When the position becomes vacant, the next person whom POTUS appoints and the Senate confirms becomes Chief Justice, even if they haven't been on SCOTUS before. Five Justices have become Chief Justice after being an associate Justice.  But they had to be appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate to that new position.  Effectively, they lost their old position on SCOTUS and got another one, that of Chief Justice.  And then POTUS had to appoint another judge to take their original position.  No Democratic POTUS would ever appoint Barrett to Chief Justice.  And no Republican POTUS not named Trump would appoint her either.  She's a raving dipshiat.  No one would want her to be the face of SCOTUS.  The Republicans would find a new judge to be Chief Justice.  Even if they waned to appoint a Republican woman as Chef Justice, they would find a new one who wouldn't show up to the official SCOTUS class photo in Aunt Lydia cosplay.

You have way more faith in the Republican party than I do. Every Republican President since Nixon has been dumber and more corrupt than the previous one.


It isn't so much faith, as I consider them all narcissistic misogynistic shiatheels above all else.  Putting her on the court as a giant posthumous Fark You to RGB, basically putting the anti-RGB in to replace her. But no Republican would want a woman as Chief Justice.  But even if they did do some kind of calculus that said the Chief Justice had to be a woman, that then-current POTUS would want his own flavor of gimp-girl in the seat, not Trump's sloppy seconds.  And she is a particularly dumb form of twatwaffle.  Even the thoroughly evil Chief Justices could act like they belonged. Barrett would be lucky to not launch into an hour-long screed against Vatican II when they tried to say the Pledge of Allegiance.  You don't want that sort of headache, reminding everyone you all gargled orange cock back in the day.  It would reflect badly on the POTUS, so they would pick a more conventionally Nazi Republican woman, not Amy, Rabid Labradoodle of the SS.
 
2020-12-04 1:38:22 PM  

Aquapope: mrshowrules: They want SCOTUS to block the PA certification because "vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional".

And here I thought it was because of dead out-of-state illegal immigrants who used a sharpie on pre-printed ballots which zombie Chavez switched to Biden votes on 47 USB drives on a German server and shipped back to the US through sanctuary cities.

Don't forget the double top secret special ops raid on a German server farm in violation of several international laws and treaties.


How is that not believable? I mean a shoot out that kid five soldiers in the middle of Frankfurt yet no one other then Q knows about it. You know it was covered as a helicopter crash in Egypt because that a shoot out in Frankfurt is a lot easier to believe then a crash of a helicopter with the Knick name "crash hawk".
 
2020-12-04 1:43:27 PM  
The real question here is how a certain farker is going to try and weasel out of the bet now.
 
2020-12-04 1:44:45 PM  

Target Builder: Aside from SCOTUS making the case moot with the responding deadlines...

Doesn't the PA constitution item in question say, efficiency:

"The government must allow and provide for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

Not:

"The government may only allow for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

I'm not a lawyer, but seems the first option doesn't make it unconstitutional for the PA government to provide absentee voting for additional classes of people.


Yes, you don't need to be a lawyer to see their lawsuit is absolutely moronic.

Not gonna stop them from trying though.
 
2020-12-04 1:45:42 PM  
Lunchtime banter here.

So let me pose this. Trump lost. Everyone knows it deep down except maybe for him. Republicans at heart are only pandering to him because he turned that base to him and his style. And yeah I get that what is basically driving these idiots is power and greed.

On the other hand....unless they have something shocking up their sleeves...why do all of this? What purpose does it really serve to spend all of this money and go 1-42 or whatever it's at?

Is the sole objective here to say in 2024 that he got robbed?  If that's the case, I would say Biden should focus on an AG who will be ruthless. It's the only way to clean this out.
 
2020-12-04 1:48:52 PM  

freakay: On the other hand....unless they have something shocking up their sleeves...why do all of this? What purpose does it really serve to spend all of this money and go 1-42 or whatever it's at?


The money was raised to fight these battles and ALSO to pay back campaign debt.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-ca​m​paign-legal-defense-donations-debt/

That's the point, to keep raising more money.
 
2020-12-04 1:50:42 PM  

mpirooz: So SCOTUS is saying "nope" loud and clear without ever having to actually say it.

I don't like SCOTUS playing political games like this. I wonder how the other judges feel about Alito throwing SCOTUS to Cult45 as red meat while also politicizing the court in the eyes of the rest of the country. I can't imagine it's good.


Unfortunately, at this point, everything the SCOTUS does or doesn't will be considered political.
 
2020-12-04 1:51:27 PM  

Target Builder: Aside from SCOTUS making the case moot with the responding deadlines...

Doesn't the PA constitution item in question say, efficiency:

"The government must allow and provide for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

Not:

"The government may only allow for absentee voting in Cases A, B, C and D"

I'm not a lawyer, but seems the first option doesn't make it unconstitutional for the PA government to provide absentee voting for additional classes of people.


In short, the plaintiffs are conflating absentee voting and vote by mail.

The PA constitution says that the government can come up with whatever method for voting it wants so long as voters' ballots remain secret - that's the only stated requirement.

It also says that the government has to allow people who cannot vote in-person at their precinct for a variety of reasons to have an alternative method to vote ("absentee" voting), but doesn't specify what that method is (it could be early voting at a centralized early voting center, for example). Specifically, it never says that absentee voting will be conducted by mail, and the only time mail voting may be used is when a voter cannot vote in-person on Election Day. The plaintiffs are pretty much arguing that this is what the constitution says.

Finally, Act 77 is very clear in stating that vote by mail is not replacing absentee voting - this is in addition to absentee mail-in voting.

The case has zero merit.
 
2020-12-04 1:58:26 PM  

jst3p: freakay: On the other hand....unless they have something shocking up their sleeves...why do all of this? What purpose does it really serve to spend all of this money and go 1-42 or whatever it's at?

The money was raised to fight these battles and ALSO to pay back campaign debt.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-cam​paign-legal-defense-donations-debt/

That's the point, to keep raising more money.


And to skim money in all kinds of way. He will require anyone on his legal defense to stay (or at least pay for) rooms at his hotels and charge the defense fund, etc.
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.