As some may know, the SCOTUS docketed the Brunson case on June 22nd. They began hearing the case and should have a decision by Saturday June 24th. The results would lead to annulment of the 2020 Election which would dissolve the Biden Administration and the majority of Congress for not investigating the fraud of the 2020 election.
SCOTUS could have denied it on Thursday but are continuing arguments. The case was accepted under a rule 11. A rule 11 has never been docketed in this manner by anyone outside of a federal government case that was brought in the 1970's. Rule 11 means the case is of imperative public importance (SCOTUS had to decide that and docket this in that manner).
Prayers up warriors - I know the Brunson case has received many critics but this would definitely qualify as a swamp flush.
Based on the numerous interviews I've watched with 2 of the Brunson brothers, this case being considered by SCOTUS is not about "annulling" the 2020 election. At all. It's about Biden/Harris/Cabinet members (and most members of the U.S. House & Senate) not having written, sworn oaths to the Constitution being on file (after no docs returned after FOIA requests were submitting asking for proof of their oaths of office).
All these UN-elected officials have to do to remedy this is to get ole Hussein's forger team (although the Hawaii lady died in a plane crash - the only one to die on that plane) and whip up some fake, certified "oaths of office" and retro-date them with a fake notary stamp. These criminals can fake a President's birth certificate and steal 50 states of elections - repeatedly - at will. We're supposed to believe that these frauds won't just whip up some fake documents to cover their tracks?
The "remedy" requested in the Brunson case could POTENTIALLY remove around 85% of Congress members (AS IF anyone would actually go along with that and execute the SCOTUS court order), but it would not "reverse" or "annul" the 2020 election.
Biden/Harris could possibly be removed from office - but for completely different reasons (not for stealing the election). And this case (IF it even gets moved forward to a hearing - IF 4 of the 9 SCOTUS Justices vote to move the case to a hearing - after denying it from a hearing twice before already) would in no way put Trump back into office as the President (where he rightfully belongs) as if he had won the election.
Again, I say all this based on numerous interviews with Brunson brothers that I've watched. I'm not an attorney and don't play one on TV either. I've read enough of the case legal-speak to have some sense of what the case is about.
Are you possibly talking about a different (the other) Brunson case perhaps?
It addresses both from what I gather from the conclusion. Remove them from congress and revisit the other Brunson case.
Conclusion:
This petition is set forth in the interest of justice in protecting Brunson’s right to petition for a redress of grievances that needs this Court’s supervisory power to be protected, and to cure the national security breach as stated above, and to ensure the right of due process against the encroachment of the doctrine of equitable maxim is protected, and charging the Respondents who failed to investigate the allegations of a breach in our election by having them removed from office without further delay for the violation of their oath of office.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-1028/264270/20230425133210857_20230425-132551-00002580-00000251.pdf