Why I don't think the Supreme Court will take up the Pennsylvania case [View all]

[StarfishSaver]

1. The Court takes very few cases that are appealed to it. They are NOT going to waste their time on this nothingburger.

2. Jurisdiction would have to be based on there being a constitutional question that needs to be resolved. As the trial court made clear, the plaintiffs failed to properly allege and definitely didn't present anything close to sufficient evidence that the defendant violated the Constitutional rights of the Trump campaign or the two voters who brought the suit.

3. Even if they wanted to find a Constitutional violation, that would create a very dangerous precedent that the Court would NOT want.

The plaintiffs are claiming their rights were violated because the counties where they voted didn't go out of their way to facilitate their ability to vote by notifying them if an opportunity to cure their faulty ballots while other counties did do that for their voters and that this warrants the votes of ALL other voters be thrown out.

If the Court were to find that that inconsistency was a violation of equal protection and/or due process, that would open the floodgates for minority and low-income voters to demand similar response to other inconsistencies in voting systems.

Fewer machines and longer lines in Philly than in the suburbs? FIX IT OR THROW OUT EVERYONE'S VOTE!

Different early voting hours in different counties in Florida? CHANGE IT OR THROW OUT EVERYONE'S VOTE!

The Court is NOT going there.