The Supreme Court is running the clock on Trump's election lawsuits, experts say

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

President Donald Trump is pursuing an expansive legal assault on vote certification in battleground states that he lost to President-elect Joe Biden.

And in his speech on election night falsely declaring victory, he said "we'll be going to the US Supreme Court" to address the "major fraud in our nation."

The Supreme Court doesn't seem interested.
snip
The lack of movement from the Supreme Court, according to Michael Dorf, a constitutional-law professor at Cornell Law School, suggests that Chief Justice John Roberts has little appetite to take on the case.

https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-hear-trump-election-lawsuits-time-running-out-2020-11

[Walleye]

1. Roberts does seem relatively sane, but you never know anymore

[dansolo]

3. Roberts got his conservative majority

There is no more need for Trump anymore screwing everything up.

[Walleye]

6. Correct. So let's hope logic prevails.

[Towlie]

8. Wait, what? A conservative majority gives you hope that logic will prevail?

That's what it sounds like you're saying.

[Walleye]

9. Only that Roberts follows his own self interest and cuts himself loose from this maniac

of a president. I have no hope for any of the other decisions.

[dalton99a]

2. If the Trump Court nullifies the election and gives the traitor another term, then it is time

for Blue states to ignore the Trump Court and withdraw participation from a system that disrespects and disfranchises them

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

4. Taxation without representation is tyranny. nt

[dalton99a]

5. Precisely.

[beachbumbob]

7. there is NO standing and no reason for SC to interefere with state election outcomes

[Thekaspervote]

10. Exactly..they made it very clear in their ruling b4 the election that states controlled elections

[beachbumbob]

11. yep and all the lawuits so far have had NO merit as NO OFFER of evidence that has held up to review

as being legit

[IsItJustMe]

12. Not sure about this

Last edited Thu Nov 19, 2020, 12:41 PM - Edit history (1)

I read somewhere that on one of DT's law suits, the Supreme Court was divided on taking up the case, four being in favor, four being against (abstaining from the vote, including Roberts), and Barrett neither abstaining or voting because she said she did not know enough about the case to vote one way or the other. Barrett can change her mind and that case could end up before the SC.

I think it was the case in PA of ballots post marked before the end of the election, but received after the election. We shall see.