Fri Dec 11, 2020, 08:01 PM
Laelth (32,014 posts)
I can't find an official copy of the Order (TX v. PA, GA, MI, and WI).
This is as much as I could get. It’s from the SCOTUS docket:
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. 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.
Democracy lives to fight another day! ![]() -Laelth
|
4 replies, 555 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Laelth | Dec 2020 | OP |
dweller | Dec 2020 | #1 | |
Laelth | Dec 2020 | #2 | |
stillcool | Dec 2020 | #3 | |
Laelth | Dec 2020 | #4 |
Response to dweller (Reply #1)
Fri Dec 11, 2020, 08:05 PM
Laelth (32,014 posts)
2. Excellent. Thank you.
That’s exactly what shows up on the docket.
-Laelth |
Response to Laelth (Original post)
Fri Dec 11, 2020, 08:06 PM
stillcool (32,620 posts)
3. This post has a link to the pdf
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100214695393
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf but it's the same thing...I think. |
Response to stillcool (Reply #3)
Fri Dec 11, 2020, 08:09 PM
Laelth (32,014 posts)
4. Thanks.
Yes. It is.
![]() -Laelth |