Yes. This has always been a reason for lack of standing. They should have figured that out. Kari Lake did, and she specifically stated that the cheating affected her specific outcome and had enough proof of the number of ballots to flip it.
And the real issue with standing, is that no citizen has any constitutional right to vote for POTUS/VP. As a point of fact, we don't actually vote for either. We vote for ELECTORS, who then vote for POTUS/VP. Electors DO have an explicit constitutional right to vote for POTUS/VP, a right which many states have suppressed for a very long time by passing and enforcing laws requiring Electors to essentially be messengers, couriers, merely conveying a vote, as opposed to exercising free agency which is essential to the nature of voting. Of course, SCOTUS recently fucked this in their 9-0 ruling in Chiafalo in 2021.
The only parties with absolute standing in these cases, are 1.) the Electors who were denied their office as the result of unlawful appointments, the result of fraudulent elections and 2.) The candidate who was denied the office he sought by the state officials who conducted unlawful elections and unlawfully appointed his opponent's pledged Electors on the basis of fraudulent elections.
lack of standing; supposedly he didn't prove that he had a "personal stake in the outcome of the action"
https://www.ntd.com/supreme-court-rejects-case-seeking-to-overturn-2020-election_894187.html
Yes. This has always been a reason for lack of standing. They should have figured that out. Kari Lake did, and she specifically stated that the cheating affected her specific outcome and had enough proof of the number of ballots to flip it.
The way I see it is that this case is utter BS.
They asking for a remedy that’s unconstitutional; that SCOTUS fires almost the entire Congress, POTUS and the VP.
SCOTUS can’t unseat elected officials, and that’s a good thing when you think about it.
Fraud vitiates everything.
Totally agree, that’s why the court case must be bullet proof.
And that’s why you can’t ask the SCOTUS for a remedy to unseat elected members of Congress/POTUS. That’s asking the SCOTUS to act unconstitutional.
I’m really happy that only Congress itself and WTP can unseat elected members, imagine how long Trump would’ve last under the 2017 SCOTUS?
Obviously this doesn't mean what you think it does.
This is so frustrating! We the people have standing, ffs.
They have an oath. Without an oath, what are they?
Tyrants.
And the real issue with standing, is that no citizen has any constitutional right to vote for POTUS/VP. As a point of fact, we don't actually vote for either. We vote for ELECTORS, who then vote for POTUS/VP. Electors DO have an explicit constitutional right to vote for POTUS/VP, a right which many states have suppressed for a very long time by passing and enforcing laws requiring Electors to essentially be messengers, couriers, merely conveying a vote, as opposed to exercising free agency which is essential to the nature of voting. Of course, SCOTUS recently fucked this in their 9-0 ruling in Chiafalo in 2021.
The only parties with absolute standing in these cases, are 1.) the Electors who were denied their office as the result of unlawful appointments, the result of fraudulent elections and 2.) The candidate who was denied the office he sought by the state officials who conducted unlawful elections and unlawfully appointed his opponent's pledged Electors on the basis of fraudulent elections.