U.S. judge weighs bid to void 127,000 votes cast at drive-through sites in Texas

[Gothmog]

The author of this article has been posting updates on twitter. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-texas/u-s-judge-weighs-bid-to-void-127000-votes-cast-at-drive-through-sites-in-texas-idUSKBN27I158?il=0

HOUSTON (Reuters) - A federal judge in Texas will consider on Monday whether Houston officials should throw out about 127,000 votes already cast in the U.S. presidential election at drive-through voting sites in the Democratic-leaning area.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen was set to hear an emergency bid at 10:30 a.m. local time (16:30 GMT) by a Republican state legislator and others who accuse Harris County Clerk Chris Hollins, a Democrat, of exceeding his constitutional authority by allowing drive-through voting as an alternative during the coronavirus pandemic.

The lawsuit was brought on Wednesday by plaintiffs including state Representative Steve Toth, conservative activist Steve Hotze, and judicial candidate Sharon Hemphill.

The Texas Supreme Court, a state court, on Sunday rejected a nearly identical bid by the same plaintiffs to halt drive-through voting in Harris County. The same court also previously denied similar challenges brought by the Texas Republican Party and the Harris County Republican Party.

Texas, the second largest U.S. state, is traditionally a Republican state, but polls show a tight race this year between President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden with more than 9 million ballots already cast, eclipsing the state’s total turnout from the 2016 presidential election.

Here is the author's twitter feed

Link to tweet

[brush]

1. Federal judges usually don't overrule state Supreme Courts.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

4. The Supreme Court did exactly that last week in Wisconsin.

[brush]

5. Wasn't that a district court ruling, not a Wisconsin Supreme Ct. ruling?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

6. I think you are right.

Did it not go through the State Supreme Court?

Regardless, they are signaling some weird interpretation that only the legislature can decide

https://www.vox.com/2020/10/26/21535503/supreme-court-wisconsin-democratic-national-committee-neil-gorsuch-brett-kavanaugh-bush-v-gore

According to Gorsuch, the key word in these constitutional provisions is “Legislature.” He claims that the word “Legislature” must be read in a hyper-literal way. “The Constitution provides that state legislatures — not federal judges, not state judges, not state governors, not other state officials — bear primary responsibility for setting election rules,” he writes.

The implications of this view are breathtaking. Just last week, the Supreme Court split 4-4 on whether to overturn a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision that also would have allowed some mailed-in ballots that arrive after Election Day to be counted. Both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were among the dissenters, though because there were no written opinions, neither explained why they would have thrown out the state supreme court’s decision.

[brush]

7. I agree they're trying anything they can to get trump re-elected.

I hold out hope in the Texas case that they will refrain from overruling the state's own Supreme Court.

[In It to Win It]

10. They're trying. The only "swingable" justice is Roberts on this. I believe Roberts' view is that

the these are matters for the state court and the state courts should be the final arbiter of state election rules.

[brush]

12. I think Roberts believes in respecting the sovereignty of...

at least a state's Supreme Court, and he's also concerned about his own legacy, being the Chief Justice.

[In It to Win It]

13. Agreed! It seems like they could be trying to through out a state's legislative process with their

opinion.

Their opinion seems to be that the legislature makes the rules, and only the legislature. It leaves me with the question of what exactly do they believe the role of the governor in this. Under their view, can a governor veto election rules legislation? Does election rules legislation go through the process of getting a governor's signature?

[In It to Win It]

8. That is correct. The US Supreme Court reversed the US district court.

[CrispyQ]

2. "We will open the ballots & if Trump is selected the ballot will count, if not, not."

Basically, that's what they want. There is a sub-set of white people that need to get the fuck over themselves. They were only ever for representative government as long as the system was rigged in their favor. Once demographics started to change, they had to rig the system more & more, & even outright steal in order to win. This is why I can't respect anyone who still identifies with the republican party—they want to silence the voice of people who disagree with them.

[brush]

9. You are exactly right.

They only want "democracy" if it's to their benefit only, not the nation's or anyone else's.

[dalton99a]

3. Kick

[Hekate]

11. KnR

[Gothmog]

14. Court rejects Plaintiff's case

Link to tweet

[The Magistrate]

15. I Am Pleasantly Surprised, Sir

I did not think this hard right hack had it in him.

[Gothmog]

17. I know some people who voted this way

I would have used this method if available to me

[Gothmog]

16. Yeah

Link to tweet