I think they SHOULD factor public interest in when taking cases and they oftentimes have in our history.
It's the actual verdicts and outcomes in the reading of the case that we want to stay Constitutionalist... so I guess I'm agreeing with you! Hah 🤣
I read somewhere yesterday that the reason given to not hear the case was that they couldn't enforce the removal. Not sure if it was true that there was actually a reason given, but I know its true that they couldn't actually enforce it.
I feel like if the case was a little more focused, and asked for something more in line with what SCOTUS could do like say rule if their oath of office immunity is Constitutional or not, it could have a better shot of being taken up to be heard. Maybe we'll get something like that down the line, from where this one started off.
I think the biggest deal with it so far is that it was not kicked for not having standing.... so we have some kind of baseline for who is the aggrieved party (or plaintiff or whatever legal jargon is appropriate) in the 2020 election. I don't know though I'm just playing Perry Mason Jr. like a lot of us. 😁
I think they SHOULD factor public interest in when taking cases and they oftentimes have in our history.
It's the actual verdicts and outcomes in the reading of the case that we want to stay Constitutionalist... so I guess I'm agreeing with you! Hah 🤣
I read somewhere yesterday that the reason given to not hear the case was that they couldn't enforce the removal. Not sure if it was true that there was actually a reason given, but I know its true that they couldn't actually enforce it.
I feel like if the case was a little more focused, and asked for something more in line with what SCOTUS could do like say rule if their oath of office immunity is Constitutional or not, it could have a better shot of being taken up to be heard. Maybe we'll get something like that down the line, from where this one started off.
I think the biggest deal with it so far is that it was not kicked for not having standing.... so we have some kind of baseline for who is the aggrieved party (or plaintiff or whatever legal jargon is appropriate) in the 2020 election. I don't know though I'm just playing Perry Mason Jr. like a lot of us. 😁