Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[digitaldog]

The Supremes just told Texas to blow it out their ass (or, arse, if you went to Oxford.)

Not unexpected but excellent news. Some additional details:

The Supreme Court acted with unusual speed to reject a bid from Texas’ attorney general— supported by President Trump — to block the ballots of millions of voters in battleground states that went in favor of President-elect Joe Biden.

The court’s move to dismiss the challenge is the strongest indication yet, that Trump has no chance of overturning election results in court that even the justices who he placed on the Supreme Court have no interest in allowing his desperate legal bids to continue.

The court did not provide a vote count but there were no dissents to the order. Justice Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas would have allowed the case to be filed with the court, but emphasized they would grant no other relief.

[Chris Kern]

Everyone has filed their briefs, and Texas has filed its reply brief, so the paperwork is done. The justices held their Friday conference call, so we should hear something soon. . . .  The Electoral College meets on Monday. Only 41 days to go.

The Supreme Court denied the request by Texas to file a claim pursuant to the Court's original jurisdiction on procedural grounds, specifically for lack of standing to sue — in other words, because Texas made no legally plausible claim of injury.  Two of the nine justices would have allowed Texas to file for purely technical reasons not germane to the substance of the case.  The Court will not interfere with the normal Electoral College process to select the president and vice president.

The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. . . .  I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.  (Citation omitted.)

[Alan Klein]

Your imagined motivations seem to neglect that there is no constitutional or legal basis for which the Court would have any reason to intervene.

I recall there was a disagreement that the governor or judiciary overrode that state's legislature (PA) as to who is eligible to vote or how the vote was to be counted.  I forget the exact details.  But the point is that it was similar in character to why the Supreme Court involved itself in Florida's court's decision in 2000. 

As we have seen over and over, the Supreme Court can find many reasons that it thinks the constitution is involved, if they want to, even when many people see no constitutional grounds at all.  I think in 2020, they're just not going to try very hard to find a reason to involve themselves.

[Peter McLennan]

Why is that? Is there a process there that converts human beings into robots incapable of normal human error or oversight?

Agreed.  There's a wide gulf between honest typos and incompetent spelling.

[faberryman]

As we have seen over and over, the Supreme Court can find many reasons that it thinks the constitution is involved, if they want to, even when many people see no constitutional grounds at all.  I think in 2020, they're just not going to try very hard to find a reason to involve themselves.

Perhaps you can articulate why you think Texas had standing. Please cite legal authorities.

[digitaldog]

I forget the exact details. 

Enough said. Maybe research what you wish to express before just saying it.

As we have seen over and over, the Supreme Court can find many reasons that it thinks the constitution is involved, if they want to, even when many people see no constitutional grounds at all.

But you forgot to provide any details of what you've 'seen'. Or many people other than yourself. Which is only a bit refreshing when you so often tell us what everyone, or every American thinks.

[faberryman]

So I guess this means Texas Attorney General Paxton won’t be getting his pardon. Trump doesn’t like losers.

I almost forgot to mention that the FBI served a subpoena on Paxton on Wednesday in a bribery investigation. It seems his staff ratted him out.

https://www.courthousenews.com/fbi-subpoenas-texas-ag-ken-paxton-after-alleged-bribery-reports/

[faberryman]

No tweet from Trump yet. He is probably still in restraints. He better get two scoops of ice cream tonight or no telling what will happen.

[chez]

Agreed.  There's a wide gulf between honest typos and incompetent spelling.

And since this site has world wide participation where English might not be the members 1st language...I think all this spelling BS needs to be nipped in the bud.

[chez]

No tweet from Trump yet. He is probably still in restraints. He better get two scoops of ice cream tonight or no telling what will happen.

He's still trying to get over Biden who once again beat him...Time's person of the year.

[faberryman]

So now the Texas GOP wants Texas to secede from the union.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/529926-texas-gop-chair-appears-to-suggest-secession-after-scotus-rejects

[Alan Klein]

Brits to send Naval vessels against their French neighbors.  Please keep America out of it this time.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-the-papers-55283043
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/12/uk/brexit-no-deal-navy-intl-gbr/index.html

[faberryman]

So I thought all the nutty stuff going on was in the US. Turns out that the UK is in on the action. I read in this article that the British navy is deploying gunboats to guard UK waters in the event of a no-deal Brexit. It is unclear if it is only to prevent the EU from stealing UK fish or if the UK is expecting an invasion. While fishing rights is an important national issue, it also seems like a perfect opportunity for Monty Python to weigh in.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/12/uk/brexit-no-deal-navy-intl-gbr/index.html

[Robert Roaldi]

So now the Texas GOP wants Texas to secede from the union.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/529926-texas-gop-chair-appears-to-suggest-secession-after-scotus-rejects

Oh no, not Texit.

[faberryman]

Instead of firing Bill Barr, Trump just complains that he hasn’t done anything about Hunter Biden and that the Dunham investigation of the investigation is late. You know Trump is mad because he squeezed the devil out of his tube of suntan cream. Check out this photo. Seriously, what kind of guy wears makeup?

https://nypost.com/2020/12/12/trump-trashes-barr-says-he-will-do-nothing-about-hunter-biden/

[jeremyrh]

So I thought all the nutty stuff going on was in the US. Turns out that the UK is in on the action. I read in this article that the British navy is deploying gunboats to guard UK waters in the event of a no-deal Brexit. It is unclear if it is only to prevent the EU from stealing UK fish or if the UK is expecting an invasion. While fishing rights is an important national issue, it also seems like a perfect opportunity for Monty Python to weigh in.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/12/uk/brexit-no-deal-navy-intl-gbr/index.html

It's to protect the fish which live in British waters so that they can be caught by British fishermen. However, the British don't actually like those species of fish and, in the past at least, have exported them to the EU countries where they eat them.  It's the type of stupidity that was sold to the electorate by the liar "Johnson" Johnson under the banner of "sovereignty". The UK imports 70% of the fish it eats and exports 80% of the fish it catches. Free trade would be of obvious benefit but instead we choose to re-run old episodes of Dad's Army and pretend to be special.

[faberryman]

So apparently, today’s march on Washington by Trump supporters will be lead by Mike Lindell aka the MyPillow Guy and other dignitaries from across the spectrum of Fox News, Newsmax, an OAN. Even Michael Flynn is going to be there, though probably in disguise to evade the assassins who are hot on his trail. Poor Michael Flynn.

The crowd Is going to start at Freedom Square (no idea where that is) and March down to the Supreme Court, which of course is closed because it is Saturday. It is emblematic of Trump’s legal “strategy” of being a day late and a dollar short.  No word yet whether Trump is going to get in his armored caravan and go waive at the crowd on his way to the golf course.

News Update:

Trump flew over the "crowd" in Marine One on his way to the Army-Navy football game. If Trump is playing golf and attending football games while you are out protesting on his behalf, don't you feel at least a little let down? Some of those people drove 14 hours from Florida to attend. I am no expert, but this sounds like codependency to me.

[Alan Klein]

It's to protect the fish which live in British waters so that they can be caught by British fishermen. However, the British don't actually like those species of fish and, in the past at least, have exported them to the EU countries where they eat them.  It's the type of stupidity that was sold to the electorate by the liar "Johnson" Johnson under the banner of "sovereignty". The UK imports 70% of the fish it eats and exports 80% of the fish it catches. Free trade would be of obvious benefit but instead we choose to re-run old episodes of Dad's Army and pretend to be special.

I'm sure Biden will make a better trade deal with GB than Trump.  Trump didn't like fish; only McDonalds.

[faberryman]

Fox News has a new poll out. 68 percent of Republicans think the election was stolen from Trump and 77 percent of his voters think he actually won. Overall, 36 percent of voters think the election was stolen from Trump. 85 percent of people who think Trump was robbed want him to run again. Sort of sounds like the setup for an SAT question to me. For a $35 contribution to the Trump campaign, Fox News will send you the correct answer.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-president-trump-robbed-poll

Seems to me it just confirms there is a bell curve for intelligence.

[TechTalk]

I recall there was a disagreement that the governor or judiciary overrode that state's legislature (PA) as to who is eligible to vote or how the vote was to be counted.  I forget the exact details.  But the point is that it was similar in character to why the Supreme Court involved itself in Florida's court's decision in 2000. 

No. The cases were not "similar in character".

As we have seen over and over, the Supreme Court can find many reasons that it thinks the constitution is involved, if they want to, even when many people see no constitutional grounds at all.  I think in 2020, they're just not going to try very hard to find a reason to involve themselves.

Your imagined motivations seem to neglect that there is no constitutional or legal basis for which the Court would have any reason to intervene.