Not yet, and given how things have panned out with them to date, I’m not holding my breath.
However… the basis of this is on constitutional grounds, and not election fraud — Rule 11. That gives me slightly more hope that they’ll agree to hear it. They would likely remand the case to the lower court.
Indeed, this is a procedural, Constitutional matter. However, I think his argument about Congress being required to hear, investigate and rule on objections, is a weak one to make, especially given that Congress has no Electoral adjudication power under the Constitution. Doesn't matter what 3 USC (fka the ECA 1887) says if the statute itself is unconstitutional. The real criminals liable here, are the state officials who certified unlawful elections and illegally appointed Electors who didn't actually win any elections, and the judges who have refused to adjudicate the cases challenging the unlawful elections.
As to whether review will be granted, I highly doubt it. SCOTUS will argue "lack of standing." The legitimate plaintiffs are the Electors who had their elections stolen (not Trump, technically). Unfortunately, because SCOTUS wrongly ruled in Chiafalo, precedent has been set that will destroy our Electoral system unless remedied.
That is what I thought as well but it seems anything is possible.
At the time Jay Sekolow argued that this could go either way and set a precedent. And it did set a precedent which I think has caused a lot of difficulty moving forward due to how the SC ruled at the time.
They skipped the 10th circuit filed under national emergency, got a call from the Supreme Court clerk 5 days later. Subsequently the 10th circuit backed up the decicion
All things point to it’s a go if they get 4 of 9 justices to agree
A lot of momentum and timing is everything the SC has an axe to grind and this gives them carte Blanche.
As I said, until SCOTUS grants review, it's a nothingburger. If they do, well then perhaps it's something. Until then... it should be taken as Kraken 2.0
Did SCOTUS actually grant review? Until they do, this is a nothingburger.
Not yet, and given how things have panned out with them to date, I’m not holding my breath.
However… the basis of this is on constitutional grounds, and not election fraud — Rule 11. That gives me slightly more hope that they’ll agree to hear it. They would likely remand the case to the lower court.
Indeed, this is a procedural, Constitutional matter. However, I think his argument about Congress being required to hear, investigate and rule on objections, is a weak one to make, especially given that Congress has no Electoral adjudication power under the Constitution. Doesn't matter what 3 USC (fka the ECA 1887) says if the statute itself is unconstitutional. The real criminals liable here, are the state officials who certified unlawful elections and illegally appointed Electors who didn't actually win any elections, and the judges who have refused to adjudicate the cases challenging the unlawful elections.
As to whether review will be granted, I highly doubt it. SCOTUS will argue "lack of standing." The legitimate plaintiffs are the Electors who had their elections stolen (not Trump, technically). Unfortunately, because SCOTUS wrongly ruled in Chiafalo, precedent has been set that will destroy our Electoral system unless remedied.
How do constituents, and legal voters, not have standing to demand their representatives investigate a matter?
Not that I necessarily agree with it, but legal magick 😉
That is what I thought as well but it seems anything is possible.
At the time Jay Sekolow argued that this could go either way and set a precedent. And it did set a precedent which I think has caused a lot of difficulty moving forward due to how the SC ruled at the time.
From the article of OP
"He already had experience with the SCOTUS by bringing two petitions to them, both of which were denied....."
Nothing burger.
Surprised you weren't banned for pointing out the obvious.
A god... not THE God...
https://youtu.be/6VF5P7qLaEQ
Strike me down...
https://youtu.be/iVBX7l2zgRw
I must have guardian 👼🏻
Not a nothingburger at all.
They skipped the 10th circuit filed under national emergency, got a call from the Supreme Court clerk 5 days later. Subsequently the 10th circuit backed up the decicion
All things point to it’s a go if they get 4 of 9 justices to agree
A lot of momentum and timing is everything the SC has an axe to grind and this gives them carte Blanche.
Listen to both videos
Super excited
As I said, until SCOTUS grants review, it's a nothingburger. If they do, well then perhaps it's something. Until then... it should be taken as Kraken 2.0