- Joined
- May 31, 2020
Doesn't the Texas case present the basic argument that the kelly case makes against more states? Makes sense to deny it then.
2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.
- Thread starter Pickle Dick
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2015
The timing of this with taking on the Texas case makes me wonder if they are dropping it to opt for that one as it's potentially stronger for SCOTUS? I'm not a law expert at all though, but I would gather they'd rather one encompassing case rather than several state-by-state ones?
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2020
It was basically the same case that Texas is filing (except it's exclusive to Pennsylvania).
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2019
Fucking 2020, everyone...
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2020
Oh, well in that case, I think it’s fine to lose it since the new one is adding all the states accused of fraud together.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2018
An all encompassing case was used for the gay marriage decision in 2015. Multi-state cases are not unheard of at the Supreme Court. To me it makes more sense because if it is all the same type of issue, it makes sense to include more states. Additionally, it will speed up the court process, thus making it easier for everyone involved.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
lol it also is completely unprecedented while being similarly baseless
u r fucked, Zionist tool
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2019
With the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the Texas case, one would think that the Pennsylvania petition was denied due to redundancy.
This is a good thing.
Multiple states locking arms on one case is much better than the fiasco that's been going on.
This is a good thing.
Multiple states locking arms on one case is much better than the fiasco that's been going on.
mandatorylurk
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
If no one objected to PA being denied then that makes it clearer they're using the Texas case to be the catch-all case.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
Because it proves you won't back up your copes with anything more. There is such a thing as the 'courage of convictions'. You don't even believe the lies you spout enough to lose a bet on an internet message board.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2019
Does this imply anything? Feel free to correct me, don't want to get my hopes up too easily.
Dr J
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2020
The Texas case is apparently on the docket
The PA appellate case is now moot because of the Texas case which is why I'm thinking it was dismissed. So, all in all, not a problem
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
I would classify this as cope if it weren't for the fact that literally none of the justices dissented on a case that is pretty cut and dry when it comes to the constitutional issues it raises. If even just one of them dissented I'd see it as "yeah, this isn't going anywhere", but as is it does seem like this Texas case will be the big one since it does it all in one go and the judges don't want to waste time, especially if other states start joining like Louisiana has already. Whatever happens, this is making for a good show so far
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
No. More retards joining a utterly meritless case because they seek higher office doesn't mean or prove anything
Reisen Storm
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2019
It means the CSA is rising from the Grave to save the union.
WhimsicalTrolli
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2019
The south has risen.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
That's from something a month ago, but if it's legitimate then I don't think it's too out there to suggest that these states will join this suit too.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2018
Is it a sign of incipient insanity that I'm going considering limiting the places I visit in the US to states that file amici curiae to the Texas case?
- Status