Trump's Post Election Fallout: Legal & Obstruction actions







Guess we'll see if they're willing to make some up this time and find a friendly judge.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
State Legislatures Can’t Ignore the Popular Vote in Appointing Electors

As the counting of votes continues, an anti-democratic suggestion has taken hold among supporters of President Trump that Republican state legislatures could prevent a Biden presidency by directly appointing Trump-supporting electors to the Electoral College, rather than by sending a delegation of electors in line with their states’ popular votes. “GET READY TO DO YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY,” tweeted conservative radio host Mark Levin on Nov. 5. Soon, Donald Trump, Jr., retweeted Levin. Later that night, Sen. Lindsey Graham joined the bandwagon. The idea is not entirely new: In September, Barton Gellman in The Atlantic reported that some state legislators were already considering this gambit—though Pennsylvania Republicans soon rejected the notion.

There are a host of clear legal problems with this suggestion, including that electors are required to be selected on Election Day, not later (absent circumstances not present here), and that due process requires a state to give effect to the fundamental right to vote for president. What’s more, such a move would justifiably be seen by much of the public as a coup. It is a terrible idea.
Click to expand...

 
The GOP Georgia senators whose elections are going to runoff are both calling for the GOP secretary of state to resign because he's following Georgia law. This party hasn't hit the anti-democracy bottom yet. They will try everything they can think of.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver said:
State Legislatures Can’t Ignore the Popular Vote in Appointing Electors
Click to expand...




There are a lot of arguments in there about the Supreme Court's views. Big hypothetical again, but if it ever managed to make its way to the Supreme Court I'd give them a 40% chance to completely flip the view they had before, because they are partisans. They'd probably try to argue states rights, or some such, and leave it up to the states to decide. There isn't a lot of reason expect for them to make the correct or just decision.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moiraine said:
Big hypothetical again, but if it ever managed to make its way to the Supreme Court I'd give them a 40% chance to completely flip the view they had before, because they are partisans. They'd probably try to argue states rights, or some such, and leave it up to the states to decide.
Click to expand...
That's possible although I think very unlikely, but as the tweets I posted above describe, it can't take effect this election without concurrence by both the Senate and the House.

 
123846642_10224788448165609_5400896212597569934_n.jpg


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top