Even a constitutional SCOTUS could not hear this case.

This case, in it's own statement of facts, is a case for a military tribunal at bare minimum.

In reality, it calls for international tribunals.

So, I predict it will absolutely fail because a SCOUTS that hears this case is more tyrannical than anything the other branches are doing.

Tell me I am wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk8PeFJgGpE

As for what you'll hear about in the news, and why:

It's all back to the same issue of Judicial Review and whether what SCOTUS says has teeth or not. Pretty much nothing they do has teeth, since there's no method of action to punish the other co-equal branches of government.

If you case relies on punishment in order to have 'justice' then your case has 'no standing' because it 'harmed everyone equally' when the truth is they don't want to rock the boat pointing fingers they can't back up with a fist.

While often viewed as the strongest branch of government, it's truly the weakest. A total joke. The other branches have fedbois, spooks, soldiers, tanks, jets, nukes, drones and AI integrated shit. SCOTUS has a pen and cool robes.

If the other branches told them to F off tomorrow, they could say nothing.

Marbury posed a difficult problem for the court, which was then led by Chief Justice John Marshall, the same person who had neglected to deliver the commissions when he was the Secretary of State. If Marshall's court commanded James Madison to deliver the commissions, Madison might ignore the order, thereby indicating the weakness of the court. Similarly, if the court denied William Marbury's request, the court would be seen as weak. Marshall held that appointee Marbury was indeed entitled to his commission. However, Justice Marshall contended that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional, since it purported to grant original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in cases not involving the States or ambassadors[citation needed]. The ruling thereby established that the federal courts could exercise judicial review over the actions of Congress or the executive branch.

However, Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 78, expressed the view that the Courts hold only the power of words, and not the power of compulsion upon those other two branches of government, upon which the Supreme Court is itself dependent. Then in 1820, Thomas Jefferson expressed his deep reservations about the doctrine of judicial review:

You seem ... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps ... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.

Really understand what Hamilton said here. He said that if SCOTUS had the kind of power anons think they do they would be the US would be an oligarchy, overnight.

So, they have no power to reign in the other branches. Even if they wanted to, all they could do is write opinions. You gotta know when to hold em' and when to fold em' and doing that would have to depend on what you think it would accomplish.

Now, you'd be right to say the timing is amazing with all that's going on in Congress. However, even if SCOTUS agreed with Brunson 100% they could do nothing about it.

So, you're banking on them to start a fight between Congress and the Military. That match would also contain the media, banks, and elite.

I'm not saying it's not possible, and I'm all for it, but steady your expectations that it would be SCOTUS having any authority other than speaking up.

Then, you have Congress pretty much blind to all special operations and other classified operations unless they are getting direct leaks.

I mean, it's dasting.

Wonder how Elon would fit in if all that were true? I bet he would.

He'd have to release something about FISA bare minimum, or pedo stuff for max effect. Vaccine doesn't cut it. People still think it was BIG PHARMA and not the Military that killed them.