"And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner." -- Barbossa in "Pirates of the Caribbean"
There's a common theme among many of the rulings on Trump's fraudulent election suits best expressed in the AZ suit where the judge said, among other things:
"they sought a remedy that she was unable to provide"
Which raises a question. Even if a Federal election of the President is blatantly fraudulent, or illegally conducted, where does it say that a court can order the election to be done over? And if no court can order a "do over", can ANY court provide a remedy?
So are all suits alleging a fraudulent or illegal Presidential election doomed before they are ever filed?
As I've said before, I'm not a constitutional scholar, nor do I play one on television. But after a few readings of Article II, section 1, clauses 2 - 4, any judge who tried to call such a "do over" would create a hairball that might involve the state legislature, the Congress, and the Supreme Court.
Given the language of Clause 4: "The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States" and the way the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment was applied to the Florida recount in Bush v Gore where SCOTUS ruled a do over in one county required a do over in all 67, a do over in one state might very well require a do over for the whole country.
Wouldn't that be fun?
I can't imagine having something like that being the highlight of my judicial career!
"And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner." -- Barbossa in "Pirates of the Caribbean"
ReplyDeleteDismissed as moot, because Trump conceded the election??? I don't remember Trump conceding the election.
ReplyDeleteThere's a common theme among many of the rulings on Trump's fraudulent election suits best expressed in the AZ suit where the judge said, among other things:
ReplyDelete"they sought a remedy that she was unable to provide"
https://www.azmirror.com/2020/12/09/judge-skewers-gop-lawsuit-to-throw-out-az-election-citing-total-lack-of-evidence/
Which raises a question. Even if a Federal election of the President is blatantly fraudulent, or illegally conducted, where does it say that a court can order the election to be done over? And if no court can order a "do over", can ANY court provide a remedy?
So are all suits alleging a fraudulent or illegal Presidential election doomed before they are ever filed?
As I've said before, I'm not a constitutional scholar, nor do I play one on television. But after a few readings of Article II, section 1, clauses 2 - 4, any judge who tried to call such a "do over" would create a hairball that might involve the state legislature, the Congress, and the Supreme Court.
Given the language of Clause 4: "The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States" and the way the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment was applied to the Florida recount in Bush v Gore where SCOTUS ruled a do over in one county required a do over in all 67, a do over in one state might very well require a do over for the whole country.
Wouldn't that be fun?
I can't imagine having something like that being the highlight of my judicial career!
"And if no court can order a "do over", can ANY court provide a remedy?"
ReplyDeleteAt the absolute least, they could give us the hangin's.
Call it "equity."