seems like trump is looking for a case to take before SCOTUS for the win

[msongs]

that's why they are coordinating all these attacks on state certification. eventually he will get a call his way that is challenged legally and the challenge will end up at SCOTUS since repubs are behind him all the way

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Yeah, this is going south and fast.

GOP has given up on Democracy, and that means this can get real bad real fast.

[stillcool]

2. I thought it was one way or the other...

and didn't think the Supreme Court had any say in how a state chooses it's electors. But I've thought a lot of things lately that were dead wrong.

[Blue_true]

3. I am trashing this thread. The republicans are throwing out unfounded

conspiracy theories. I don’t think that we should join them in that area. The fact is more than one Trump appointed Federal Judge has told him to go fish, even the US Supreme Court recently refused to hear an appeal by Trump lawyers.

[keithbvadu2]

4. Dinesh bragged about repubs' packing the Supreme Court with their conservatives for just this purpos

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100214541013

"We don't have to convince this kangaroo court, only the Supreme Court where we have ..."

Dinesh D'Souza bragged about repubs' packing the Supreme Court with their conservatives for just this purpose.

Link to tweet

[AmericanCanuck]

6. Dinesh is an idiot

[StarfishSaver]

14. And Trump judges are smacking Trump down at every turm

Do much for what Dinesh thinks ...

[AmericanCanuck]

5. Justice Roberts is not interested in being a part of the clown act

He has steadfastly refused to get involved.

[no_hypocrisy]

7. Here's the thing:

Let's say Trump consistently loses in federal district court. He appeals to the federal appeals court. He loses again. He appeals to the full appellate court. He loses yet again.

So Trump files a writ of certiorari to the USSC. The Court doesn't have to take it. They vote on it and four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case. https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1#:~:text=Typically%2C%20the%20Court%20hears%20cases,vote%20to%20accept%20a%20case.

And let's say there are four votes to hear the case. The meter is still on and December 14 is coming up hard and fast. The USSC can't extend that date for certifying the presidential election.

Do you really believe, Federalist Society aside, that the USSC will rule that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence are quaint artifacts, that they are discretionary? I don't. These standards are the framework of American jurisprudence and to set them aside for even one case would sow chaos into the Court System.

No evidence, no merit to the cases. That would be a bridge too far.

Don't get me wrong: I believe Trump would have the vote of Clarence Thomas no matter what. But I can't see Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett going along with the charade. (Plus, Barrett and Kavanaugh are ensconced. They're not going anywhere if they rule against Trump.)

[leftyladyfrommo]

8. His cases so far have been thrown out before they

made it anywhere.

Can you appeal a non case?

[Goodheart]

9. The constitutional question will be whether or not

state legislatures are allowed to change their own rules for electors once their established rules did not yield the partisan results they hoped for.

Seems to me like a clear violation of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Also would be a violation of Article I Section 10's prohibition against ex post facto law.

We are, however, dealing with a Republican Supreme Court which means, unfortunately, dishonest justices to their very core.

[struggle4progress]

10. US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 4

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors ... which Day shall be the same throughout the United States

[struggle4progress]

11. 3 USC 1

The electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed, in each State, on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President

[struggle4progress]

12. The state legislatures can change their rules for future elections, but electors were chosen 11/3/20

[Kaleva]

13. He'd have a better chance before SCOTUS if he was winning at the lower courts.

And the losing parties appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

[Vinca]

15. Given the legal outcomings so far, he's not likely to be happy with the Supreme Court if it all

lands there. I can't see even the most far right appointees - maybe with the exception of Thomas - trying to "help him out." Chances are they just won't hear the case.