Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSCOTUS is 4-4 how would they rule on state recount appeals?
Does the Chief Justice vote D?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
11 replies, 1162 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
11 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SCOTUS is 4-4 how would they rule on state recount appeals? (Original Post)
Omaha Steve
Nov 2016
OP
BUT was the only case that ruled applied to a single case in the history of the court
Omaha Steve
Nov 2016
#7
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)1. Appeals for what? n/t
Omaha Steve
(99,780 posts)6. Like FL 2000
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)2. When this recount talk sprung up. My mind immediately went to Bush/Gore
Then I thought about delimma Ruth Ginsberg would be in.
There appears to be more shoes to drop yet.
red dog 1
(27,875 posts)3. They would split 4-4
The Chief Justice does vote.
Omaha Steve
(99,780 posts)10. He voted to save Obamacare
But killed the state mandate.
tritsofme
(17,410 posts)4. For the purpose of entertaining fantasy, the appellate decision would stand
in the case of any 4-4 tie at the Supreme Court.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)5. Bush v Gore is the standing precedent
And keep in mind the merits of Bush v Gore was 7-2. It was stopping the recount that was 5-4.
Omaha Steve
(99,780 posts)7. BUT was the only case that ruled applied to a single case in the history of the court
KT2000
(20,591 posts)8. thought it was stated that it was not
to be used as precedent.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)9. Big difference between now and 2000
Namely, the vote margin and the time remaining until the states reach "safe harbor" for their electoral votes to be counted. Assuming none of the candidates gum up the works, the recounts should be done in time.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)11. Lower court ruling would stand...