Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
US Special Forces Attacked CIA Server Farm In Germany In Server Seizure Operation, 5 Soldiers Killed
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="donner" data-source="post: 3474324" data-attributes="member: 277"><p>respectfully, that would be a pretty biased position for the court to start from. While it may be true, the court is there to evaluate the merit of the suit. At this early stage, it might not necessarily say if the four defendant states actually did something wrong. The court could still hear the case and rule against Texas/trump or sidestep the issue entirely. It will still be bound by the merits of the case presented to it, which is why Texas is challenging the constitutionality and not the issue of fraud.</p><p></p><p>some people are suggesting that trumps move to intervene could undermine the Texas suit because it’d show that there are other plaintiffs who have clear paths to the court and that the issue isn’t a matter of original jurisdiction (ie could trump appealing cases in PA raise the same legal question that the Texas suit does, and if so, why would the SCOTUS bypass the lower courts by granting the leave to file). It could give the court the cover it needs to avoid the issue.</p><p></p><p>and while some folks might disagree with this wording, the SCOTUS is likely also weighing the ramifications of granting this case against the bigger picture. Would it want to open itself to the idea that one state could sue to invalidate an election in another state because of the perceived consequences? Would Oklahoma gun laws now be subject to suit from Washington DC, Illinois or New York? Or Texas’ oil and gas policies subject to suit from California ? Or how about how a republican state legislature redraws districts? Could california sue to stop the redistricting because it claims that it disenfranchised blacks and would impact the makeup of Congress?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="donner, post: 3474324, member: 277"] respectfully, that would be a pretty biased position for the court to start from. While it may be true, the court is there to evaluate the merit of the suit. At this early stage, it might not necessarily say if the four defendant states actually did something wrong. The court could still hear the case and rule against Texas/trump or sidestep the issue entirely. It will still be bound by the merits of the case presented to it, which is why Texas is challenging the constitutionality and not the issue of fraud. some people are suggesting that trumps move to intervene could undermine the Texas suit because it’d show that there are other plaintiffs who have clear paths to the court and that the issue isn’t a matter of original jurisdiction (ie could trump appealing cases in PA raise the same legal question that the Texas suit does, and if so, why would the SCOTUS bypass the lower courts by granting the leave to file). It could give the court the cover it needs to avoid the issue. and while some folks might disagree with this wording, the SCOTUS is likely also weighing the ramifications of granting this case against the bigger picture. Would it want to open itself to the idea that one state could sue to invalidate an election in another state because of the perceived consequences? Would Oklahoma gun laws now be subject to suit from Washington DC, Illinois or New York? Or Texas’ oil and gas policies subject to suit from California ? Or how about how a republican state legislature redraws districts? Could california sue to stop the redistricting because it claims that it disenfranchised blacks and would impact the makeup of Congress? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
US Special Forces Attacked CIA Server Farm In Germany In Server Seizure Operation, 5 Soldiers Killed
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom