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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFederal Judge Rejects Efforts to Invalidate Houston Votes
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-02/judge-expresses-skepticism-on-bid-to-invalidate-texas-votes?srnd=premium&utm_source=url_linkA federal judge rejected a bid by Republican activists to invalidate 127,000 votes in the most populous county in Texas.
For lack of a nicer way of saying it, I aint buying it, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen said at a hearing Monday in Houston, rejecting the request by Republican activists because of lack of standing.
16 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal Judge Rejects Efforts to Invalidate Houston Votes (Original Post)
Fahrenthold451
Nov 2020
OP
Curious about the reason: Lack of Standing. Can any law type DUer's explain?
OAITW r.2.0
Nov 2020
#3
The judge remarked that the plantiffs would have had to prove that the secretary of state
drray23
Nov 2020
#8
Yeah, there's a scary moment when you think that maybe another plaintiff could
Fahrenthold451
Nov 2020
#13
Yeah, there's a scary moment when you think that maybe another plaintiff could
Fahrenthold451
Nov 2020
#14
JMHO since the TX supreme ct already weighed in, the decision would be on his shoulders alone
Thekaspervote
Nov 2020
#9
SKKY
(12,335 posts)1. Great news indeed!!!
KewlKat
(5,660 posts)2. Yeah
OAITW r.2.0
(28,923 posts)3. Curious about the reason: Lack of Standing. Can any law type DUer's explain?
babylonsister
(171,728 posts)6. Lawyer speak for 'not a leg to stand on'?
drray23
(8,044 posts)8. The judge remarked that the plantiffs would have had to prove that the secretary of state
had "evil intentions" setting up a drive thru voting. That was not proven to him.
Fahrenthold451
(436 posts)13. Yeah, there's a scary moment when you think that maybe another plaintiff could
Prevail with the same argument, but that it's not the case here. Lack of standing can also mean that your case is such a huge piece of sh*t that you need to go away.
Fahrenthold451
(436 posts)14. Yeah, there's a scary moment when you think that maybe another plaintiff could
Prevail with the same argument, but that it's not the case here. Lack of standing can also mean that your case is such a huge piece of sh*t that you need to go away.
Blue Owl
(55,021 posts)4. K&R
The Magistrate
(96,043 posts)5. Damn, Sir
That is a pleasant surprise.
IllinoisBirdWatcher
(2,316 posts)7. Bush-appointed conservative judge no less. N/T
kwolf68
(7,876 posts)10. I know it
Gives me faith that not all Conservatives are vile POS.
Cha
(306,175 posts)16. Thanks for that.. wonder if bush
is secretly happy?
Thekaspervote
(34,967 posts)9. JMHO since the TX supreme ct already weighed in, the decision would be on his shoulders alone
Didnt want to take that responsibility
TeamPooka
(25,533 posts)11. Trump has bad lawyers everywhere. The worst
Girard442
(6,458 posts)12. BRAVO!
Ive gotten cynical in my old age and think that one of the reasons the judge ruled in our favor is that he realized that Dirtbag Donny wont be around to reward him for shivving justice.
Still, a win is a win is a win.
Cha
(306,175 posts)15. TY, Fahenthold! This is Grand NEws!