December 8... the day by which election "disputes" were supposed to have been settled

Scataphagos

Scataphagos

As per the Constitution.

Next... the state-appointed electors meet to cast their votes... December 14.

Problem... the Founders never imagine there would be wide-spread, massive FRAUD in any election... and massive contesting of election results... so didn't allow for the possibility.

So... what happens December 14? What role will SCOTUS play in this whole mess?
 
Scataphagos said:
As per the Constitution.

Next... the state-appointed electors meet to cast their votes... December 14.

Problem... the Founders never imagine there would be wide-spread, massive FRAUD in any election... and massive contesting of election results... so didn't allow for the possibility.

So... what happens December 14? What role will SCOTUS play in this whole mess?
More...
Actually, The Constitution doesn't specify Dec 8 and Dec 14. It allows Congreff to pick the date of The Electoral College. The date though can be moved or ignored. There is still time left to get America it's voting franchise back.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
Actually, The Constitution doesn't specify Dec 8 and Dec 14. It allows Congreff to pick the date of The Electoral College. The date though can be moved or ignored. There is still time left to get America it's voting franchise back.
More...

I'd read that "these are the days"... egg on my face.

What if not resolved by the intended inauguration day??
 
Scataphagos said:
As per the Constitution.

Next... the state-appointed electors meet to cast their votes... December 14.

Problem... the Founders never imagine there would be wide-spread, massive FRAUD in any election... and massive contesting of election results... so didn't allow for the possibility.

So... what happens December 14? What role will SCOTUS play in this whole mess?
More...
Let's let this play out. Many Americans are getting a necessary lesson in The Constitution and Electoral College. ---Even many legislators don't understand how this works ----and that's scary.
 
Not one lower court judge would hear the merits of those cases. Who's holding a gun to the back of their heads. Cops arresting people for just trying to make a living. Legislatures have the power to reject fraud. Supreme Court could send the mess back to the House for contingent election. Politicians are mercenaries for the most part and not the kind that would sacrifice themselves for the public good.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
Not only can states sue each other, the suit goes directly to The Supreme Court.
More...

If the state of Texas does not like how Pennsylvania handles speeding tickets..... Texas does not have standing for suing Pennsylvania in the Supreme Court for what is an internal manner in Pennsylvania. Same with how voting is run in Pennsylvania.

If Texas desired to sue... then they would have to sue in a court in Pennsylvania... but would need to prove they have standing in the case seeing 'Texas" is not a resident of Pennsylvania.

The Supreme Court will not even listen to this absurd suit from Texas DA Ken Paxton (who is under investigation by the FBI already for his illegal activities).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top