23 votes

US Supreme Court rejects Donald Trump ally’s push to overturn Joe Biden win in Pennsylvania

14 comments

  1. [2]
    stu2b50
    Link
    This is the Kelly lawsuit. In some ways it was the most reasonable of lawsuits - rather than fraud, or something fraud-like, it was arguing that Pennsylvania mail in policies were unconstitutional...

    This is the Kelly lawsuit. In some ways it was the most reasonable of lawsuits - rather than fraud, or something fraud-like, it was arguing that Pennsylvania mail in policies were unconstitutional (PA Constitution, not the federal one). Now, the remedy proposed was insane, and it is obviously stupid on the basis of laches, which is why the PA Supreme Court summarily dismissed it.

    And the fact that they tried to appeal to the US Supreme Court was also incredibly stupid - it's "dubious" (as in, not) whether or not the suit had anything to do with federal law, so it shouldn't be in the US SC's purview - the PA SC would be the end of the road.

    In any case, if anyone was worried that the Supreme Court was filled with such hyperpartisan hacks that they would even entertain these stupid appeals, rest assured. The Court is still heavily conservative leaning, but this is more in the "insane" territory than "conservative". In fact, it's kinda the opposite of conservatism the ideology.

    There is still the "texas" "lawsuit", but I doubt it will be even heard, like this case.

    18 votes
    1. Good_Apollo
      Link Parent
      I think a lot of SCOTUS doomsday-ers really forget that however the current justices lean, they don’t have to play politics anymore. That’s not to say that particular justices may be unqualified...

      I think a lot of SCOTUS doomsday-ers really forget that however the current justices lean, they don’t have to play politics anymore. That’s not to say that particular justices may be unqualified or biased in terrible ways, I understand that, but I think to believe that they’ll just toe the president’s line to be ignoring a lot of the history of the court. Maybe Trump thought it would go that way but it historically hasn’t and I don’t see it becoming wholly partisan anytime soon.

      6 votes
  2. [11]
    JXM
    Link
    I'm honestly kind of shocked at how the judicial system has just completely shut down Trump's attempts to change the results of the 2020 election. Maybe it's just because I've become so jaded by...

    I'm honestly kind of shocked at how the judicial system has just completely shut down Trump's attempts to change the results of the 2020 election.

    Maybe it's just because I've become so jaded by the last four years, where corruption has run rampant and Trump has been appointing his cronies to positions that will personally enrich them.

    I'm glad that the judicial system has so completely rejected all of his lawsuits due to complete lack of evidence. I thought they'd just roll over and let him get away with it.

    13 votes
    1. [3]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. [2]
        JXM
        Link Parent
        I think that it'll be interesting to see what happens throughout 2021 with regards to criminal and civil cases against Trump and his family.

        I think that it'll be interesting to see what happens throughout 2021 with regards to criminal and civil cases against Trump and his family.

        6 votes
        1. [2]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. nukeman
            Link Parent
            I'm more confident in people trying to hold him accountable, but I'm not confident in it sticking. I suspect Trump will declare his 2024 candidacy on January 20/21, and any charges against him...

            I'm more confident in people trying to hold him accountable, but I'm not confident in it sticking. I suspect Trump will declare his 2024 candidacy on January 20/21, and any charges against him he'll call a deep state political hit job. I can almost guarantee there will be a stochastic assassination/attempt against whatever DA is charging or prosecuting.

            6 votes
    2. [8]
      skybrian
      Link Parent
      Trump appointing a judge doesn't mean they're personally loyal to him, and judges tend to support the independence of the judicial system. So they may be conservative, but not Trumpists. Also,...

      Trump appointing a judge doesn't mean they're personally loyal to him, and judges tend to support the independence of the judicial system. So they may be conservative, but not Trumpists.

      Also, appointed judges don't need to worry about placating Trump supporters. Trump's power at this point is mostly about the number of ordinary voters listening to him. (Notice that most Republicans up for reelection won't say Biden won, yet.)

      In a way this is an argument for somewhat less democracy, since democracy is what gives Trump his power.

      5 votes
      1. [7]
        JXM
        Link Parent
        I understand your point. And it makes sense as long as the system works like it should and you appoint people with integrity. We've seen time and time again that the system was designed to work...

        I understand your point. And it makes sense as long as the system works like it should and you appoint people with integrity. We've seen time and time again that the system was designed to work largely on the honor system.

        But we all know that Trump has a history of installing those who are loyal to him. So I do think the concern was valid.

        9 votes
        1. [3]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. [2]
            JXM
            Link Parent
            I do get your point, but I disagree. Trump could very easily say, "I won't appoint you unless I think you're going to be loyal to me" and simply not nominate people who he doesn't trust.

            I do get your point, but I disagree. Trump could very easily say, "I won't appoint you unless I think you're going to be loyal to me" and simply not nominate people who he doesn't trust.

            1 vote
            1. skybrian
              Link Parent
              Maybe in theory, but Trump is terrible at getting loyalty from people who don't work for him anymore and don't fear Republican voters. He doesn't really do trust.

              Maybe in theory, but Trump is terrible at getting loyalty from people who don't work for him anymore and don't fear Republican voters. He doesn't really do trust.

              3 votes
        2. [4]
          Thrabalen
          Link Parent
          The thing is, Trump was looking at it like a business deal. "We sign the papers, we bake in a little kickback for you, everyone comes out ahead." He basically believed that the judges would be...

          The thing is, Trump was looking at it like a business deal. "We sign the papers, we bake in a little kickback for you, everyone comes out ahead." He basically believed that the judges would be beholden to him. What he failed to realize is that judges are beholden to one thing: their interpretation of the law. They may agree with him on some matters, but what matters to them is ruling on a case according to their own code.

          3 votes
          1. [2]
            wycy
            Link Parent
            This strategy would've worked if Trump was less of a buffoon and if the race was a little closer. This was a dry-run. Someone will steal it this way in the future.

            He basically believed that the judges would be beholden to him. What he failed to realize is that judges are beholden to one thing: their interpretation of the law. They may agree with him on some matters, but what matters to them is ruling on a case according to their own code.

            This strategy would've worked if Trump was less of a buffoon and if the race was a little closer. This was a dry-run. Someone will steal it this way in the future.

            6 votes
            1. cmccabe
              Link Parent
              This is one of my biggest concerns. Many of the weaknesses have been exposed, and now it's only a matter of time until someone more competent than the current president comes along and...

              Someone will steal it this way in the future.

              This is one of my biggest concerns. Many of the weaknesses have been exposed, and now it's only a matter of time until someone more competent than the current president comes along and successfully exploits them. It may be someone completely unexpected or it may even be this same president with a more effective adviser team around him.

              The next four years are going to be critical for American democracy. People may feel that the game has been won now and that they can let their guard down. Quite the opposite. We need a LOT more people like Stacey Abrams who are tirelessly working to get people involved in the democratic process, to raise awareness about what is at stake, and to organize action at all levels of government.

              9 votes
          2. JXM
            Link Parent
            In a perfect world, yes, they are only beholden to the law, but as we have seen countless times, that isn't how it works in the real world.

            In a perfect world, yes, they are only beholden to the law, but as we have seen countless times, that isn't how it works in the real world.

            1 vote
  3. stu2b50
    Link
    Supreme Court denied hearing the Texas v. Battleground States case as well. The dissenters were Alito and Thomas, who held this opinion

    Supreme Court denied hearing the Texas v. Battleground States case as well.

    The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of
    complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of
    the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially
    cognizable interest in the manner in which another State
    conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed
    as moot.

    The dissenters were Alito and Thomas, who held this opinion

    Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins:
    In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a
    bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original
    jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___
    (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore
    grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not
    grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

    3 votes