2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

[Bartleby]

Congress members throwing their hat into the ring now:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163403/20201210153048641_Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20106%20Representatives.pdf

 

[HumanHive]

Yes?

Seems to be
Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Utah, and Florida (with friends of TN, IN, WV, MT, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, MO, AR, LA, SC, PA legislature, and GA legislature)

VS

PA, WI, GA, and MI (with friends of DC, DE, NJ, HI, NM, NY, NC, OR, RI, VT, VA, WA, CO, CT, IL, Guam, and US Virgin Islands)

With Ohio saying "I'm here too!"

So it's either 19 v 18, or 19 v 21 if you count Guam, DC, and Virgin Islands.

Didn't Guam tip over and fall into the sea?

 

[Pompano Mike]

Laches is an especially weak doctrine to invoke here. They're essentially saying that the plaintiff states fell asleep at the wheel in filing this lawsuit and that because of their lack of diligence, the equities favor denying relief. But how is that supposed to work? If Texas had tried to sue these states in the Supreme Court over their election laws being violated prior to the election actually taking place, there would have an ironclad ripeness challenge to the lawsuit because the harm would not have occurred yet. So when exactly should Texas have brought suit? Laches can't be used in this way and it's likely that everyone involved is very aware of that. The absolute bullshit that lawyers shamelessly fling at courts without blinking is really something to see sometimes.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Laches is an especially weak doctrine to invoke here. They're essentially saying that the plaintiff states fell asleep at the wheel in filing this lawsuit and that because of their lack of diligence, the equities favor denying relief. But how is that supposed to work? If Texas had tried to sue these states in the Supreme Court over their election laws being violated prior to the election actually taking place, there would have an ironclad ripeness challenge to the lawsuit because the harm would not have occurred yet. So when exactly should Texas have brought suit? Laches can't be used in this way and it's likely that everyone involved is very aware of that. The absolute bullshit that lawyers shamelessly fling at courts without blinking is really something to see sometimes.

I'm sure you're aware, but that's literally the catch 22 these states have been using to throw out almost all of the lawsuits so far. It wouldn't stand to a full appeal, but it doesn't have to, it just has to delay it until Biden is crowned king.

 

[mandatorylurk]

So the blue states copy the red states by jumping on, but the red states not only get the defendant state legislatures to sign on but now we have congressmen signing on too.

At this point just let Trump and Biden fight in the ring for the presidency.

 

[AMHOLIO]

This is political and messy, so the SCOTUS should refuse to do anything

This along with "SCOTUS can't do shit about interstate disputes" is the retarded big brained argument I hoped for and its funny as fuck.

I want to feel smug that these idiots are doing exactly what I thought they’d do by just going “don’t look into this, we’re super cereal guys.”, but I’m honestly shocked they’re this blatantly stupid to the SUPREME COURT.

I mean, after PA told the SC to fuck off, I kinda expected it. They also probably weren't expecting Texas to come in being lead by Zodiac Lawyer Ted Cruz.

I know there is tons of other shit going on right now but Biden told black Civil Rights leaders "I'm not going to do anything about Police Reform" if he can't do it through the Congress.



So first progressives got BTFO'd and now BLM. MMMMM.... God. Can't you smell that.

Normalcy.

Article: https://theintercept.com/2020/12/10/biden-audio-meeting-civil-rights-leaders/
(Archive)

I'm half thinking they will deep fake Biden until Kamala can take over. Like they will have some motherfucker with a 3D capture suit shaking hands with world leaders so they can paste Biden over it for the media.

Ironically, "Biden" will probably use Twitter more than Trump ever did.

"Joe is still alive! He tweeted a dozen times today!"

Whaaaaaa biden isn't blm antifa no waaaaaay

I am prepared for Biden just to make sure my democrat friends know that the politicians aren't and never will be on their side.

 

[HumanHive]

It's kinda weird that none of them are arguing with Texas's original point that they violated state and federal constitutions regarding election law.
Either they have complete and total certainty that laches will work, or they're betting that the USSC has been threatened hard enough to not want to intervene in the election.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

So the blue states copy the red states by jumping on, but the red states not only get the defendant state legislatures to sign on but now we have congressmen signing on too.

At this point just let Trump and Biden fight in the ring for the presidency.

That's hardly fair. Biden can't even fuck a dog without hurting himself, how's he gonna fight a WWE Hall of Famer?

 

[Zero Day Defense]

So when exactly should Texas have brought suit?

Never.

The absolute bullshit that lawyers shamelessly fling at courts without blinking is really something to see sometimes.

It'd be dumb to not exhaust all possible explanations if something has the chance of sticking.

 

[Meat Target]

It's kinda weird that none of them are arguing with Texas's original point that they violated state and federal constitutions regarding election law.
Either they have complete and total certainty that laches will work, or they're betting that the USSC has been threatened hard enough to not want to intervene in the election.

The absolute bullshit that lawyers shamelessly fling at courts without blinking is really something to see sometimes

That's just Lawyerin' 101.

1. If the law is on your side, pound the law
2. If the facts are on your side, pound the facts
3. If neither are on your side, pound the table

 

[HTTP Error 404]

It's kinda weird that none of them are arguing with Texas's original point that they violated state and federal constitutions regarding election law.
Either they have complete and total certainty that laches will work, or they're betting that the USSC has been threatened hard enough to not want to intervene in the election.

Or they think this will be judged in the court of Twitter and CNN, and are arguing to them, not the SCOTUS. I mean there are some valid arguments there, I'm sure. I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea how solid it is, waiting on Nick to get back from vacation to cover it. But the impression I get is either they're literally strawmanning Texas and praying the SCOTUS doesn't notice, or they're putting on a show for the media.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

That's just Lawyerin' 101.

1. If the law is on your side, pound the law
2. If the facts are on your side, pound the facts
3. If neither are on your side, pound the table

Can't pound the defendant-- that would be "wrong", and "in contempt of court", and "sexual assault".

 

[The High Prophet of Truth]

So Fox News just had an ad sucking off Barr and saying he declared the election fair and then it said “it’s time to move forward”. What a convenient day to play this.

 

[Pompano Mike]

I'm sure you're aware, but that's literally the catch 22 these states have been using to throw out almost all of the lawsuits so far.

Oh I am aware. It was absolutely ridiculous when it happened in those lower courts too.

It'd be dumb to not exhaust all possible explanations if something has the chance of sticking.

The funny thing is that it would arguably be malpractice for them not to include the argument, despite its absurdity. Making arguments with a straight face that you know are pure nonsense is indeed Lawyerin' 101. In conclusion, kill all lawyers (at an unspecified time in Minecraft).

 

[Dr J]

I know there is tons of other shit going on right now but Biden told black Civil Rights leaders "I'm not going to do anything about Police Reform" if he can't do it through the Congress.



So first progressives got BTFO'd and now BLM. MMMMM.... God. Can't you smell that.

Normalcy.

Article: https://theintercept.com/2020/12/10/biden-audio-meeting-civil-rights-leaders/
(Archive)

I'm half thinking they will deep fake Biden until Kamala can take over. Like they will have some motherfucker with a 3D capture suit shaking hands with world leaders so they can paste Biden over it for the media.

Ironically, "Biden" will probably use Twitter more than Trump ever did.

"Joe is still alive! He tweeted a dozen times today!"

>that speech
Fuck me. Even in a transcript you can hear the dementia addled rambling
>I won't violate the Constitution
Since when?

Also yeah, it's hilarious that he's turned on BLM. I'll say this for Biden: he's got a lot of balls. Very few people would have the guts to backstab his allies and make it clear that he's bringing tyranny before he's even taken office in a highly disputed election.

It's kinda weird that none of them are arguing with Texas's original point that they violated state and federal constitutions regarding election law.

Because they know they're right

Either they have complete and total certainty that laches will work, or they're betting that the USSC has been threatened hard enough to not want to intervene in the election.

Or they live in such a complete echo chamber that they think regurgitating Twatter talking points will actually work in front of a, majority conservative, Supreme Court

 

[Catch The Rainbow]

So when will the court likely hear this if they accept? The 12th and 13th are weekends days so they have to hear this before electors vote

 

[Dr J]

So the blue states copy the red states by jumping on, but the red states not only get the defendant state legislatures to sign on but now we have congressmen signing on too.

At this point just let Trump and Biden fight in the ring for the presidency.

Fuck me I'd watch that. Twelve rounds of boxing for the Undisputed Presidency of the United States

 

[Random Internet Person]

View attachment 1779420

"around the globe"
Sandbox Mode 2.0, coming with a draft near you.

I wonder just how much people will accept one tweet to explain away something like bombing a country to oblivion. Or whatever Biden will do once in office that isn’t bringing about progressive utopia.

And we're well within our human rights to tell you to pound sand and leave us alone.

Except they’ll try to make you enjoy their shit. They may even try to hardwire your brain to accept it if they really want to. That or torture.

View attachment 1779516
View attachment 1779519

So PA's defense is.

• The SCOTUS isn't allowed to hear this
• There's no case to hear
  • And if there is Texas doesn't have standing to bring it
  • And we already stole the election so it's a moot point
• There's no actual violation
  • And especially not in the exact way we violated the constitution
  • And even if we did, Texas has no right to judge us
• And Texas has no right to stop us
  • No really
  • We changed the law unconstitutionally therefore no one can complain because we did, in fact, change the law.

If this is the best they've got...

Don't worry. Laches will save them!

20 State's Arguments:
View attachment 1779634

• Texas has no right to second guess courts who are blatantly violating the constitution and go to the SCOTUS, the place that literally exists for this purpose
• Also, COVID COVID COVID and here, have a Strawman Argument about what Texas ISN'T arguing.

Not sending their best.

MI response...

View attachment 1779639
View attachment 1779640

• SCOTUS shouldn't take this up.
  • Because SCOTUS doesn't have the ability to intervene in... inter... state... disputes.
    • Because there's totally not a case here!
    • And SCOTUS doesn't have the authority anyway
  • MOTHERFUCKING MUH LACHES
• And even if they do take this up, there's no actual relief possible
  • Because, uh, the Electors Clause isn't a thing
    • No standing no standing no standing
    • And we didn't violate nuffin!
  • And the Equal Protection Clause isn't a thing
  • Nor is Due Process
• Texas doesn't qualify for relief
  • Because Texas can't win this! Please agree before we actually have a trial
  • And even if we did rig the election in MI for Biden, it's not like Texas is HARMED by it.
  • And if you DO stop us from stealing elections, we WILL be harmed!
  • Won't someone think of the children?

Georgia phoned it in.

View attachment 1779680

Badly.

• Texas lacks standing
  • Texas was not injured by a stolen national election
  • Texas cannot speak on behalf of it's electors, who are the only people who could be harmed, but are specifically prohibited from suing about this
  • Texas claims to speak for it's citizens which are third parties and thus they can't actually sue for a third party
• This is political and messy, so the SCOTUS should refuse to do anything
  • Texas is demanding we adhere to the Constitution and we'd rather do our own thing, ergo Texas should just shut up
• This isn't a big enough thing to justify a state suing another state
  • One state rigging it's local election and causing a national election to swing another way is not, in fact, controversial
  • Texas totally could do something other than a Lawsuit, ergo, they shouldn't be allowed to sue
• Texas hasn't proven it's case yet so the case should be thrown out
  • Because we think Texas will lose
  • And because Texas wasn't harmed by us stealing an election
  • And anyway the media and popular vote agree with us so shut up
• Texas isn't entitled to a fair national election, anyway

Wisconson at least tried a little better.

View attachment 1779696
View attachment 1779697
View attachment 1779698

• SCOTUS shouldn't hear this case
  • Because Texas has no interest in us violating the constitution and stealing an election
  • And besides, our local courts already said everything was fine
  • And if you don't throw this out, we'll say mean things about the SCOTUS and it'll harm democracy
• MOTHERFUCKING MUH LACHES. BITCHES LOVE MUH LACHES
  • Texas waited too long to sue, they should have sued the picosecond the election started and not after actually creating a case
  • Our voters (including the fake ones) have due process rights and Texas is trying to violate them
    • Also, the plain text part of the constitution that says we can't do this doesn't exist, so please stop looking at it
• Texas doesn't actually make a claim other than the claims we already tried to shoot down but those don't exist, so please ignore them.
  • We might have unconstitutionally changed our laws but that doesn't mean it's a constitutional violation
  • Texas can't sue on behalf of it's voters, therefore it can't claim due process or equal protection
  • Also, Texas's claims (that don't exist, remember) are meritless
    • Because the WI Supreme Court changed the law, which they're allowed to do, even though they're actually not
• And besides, Texas can't justify stopping the election from being stolen to actually sue, so we shouldn't stop the stolen election to do this

I take it that the states are trying to go after Sotomayor and the other Obama appointee, and hoping they can convince the other justices outside of Thomas and Alito because they aren’t known to really have iron resolve and be more of a coin flip with every case. Meanwhile, Democrats are really thinking about how RBG was just supposed to last to 2021.

New thread theme.

 

[Meat Target]

Can't pound the defendant-- that would be "wrong", and "in contempt of court", and "sexual assault".

If it all collapses and I am able to make OneOfOurTrainingFacilities into a principality, I will establish Trial By Combat as the norm.

 

[Puff]

Can't pound the defendant-- that would be "wrong", and "in contempt of court", and "sexual assault".

They should really pound GA though. It is so defenseless and alone.