HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Supreme Court formally pu...

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:09 PM

Supreme Court formally puts Texas lawsuit on its docket. Case will be heard.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/texas-sues-georgia-michigan-pennsylvania-and-wisconsin-supreme-court-over-election

Hope I'm wrong about this.

65 replies, 3145 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 65 replies Author Time Post
Reply Supreme Court formally puts Texas lawsuit on its docket. Case will be heard. (Original post)
Goodheart Dec 8 OP
bearsfootball516 Dec 8 #1
Goodheart Dec 8 #2
brooklynite Dec 8 #24
Roisin Ni Fiachra Dec 8 #33
Fullduplexxx Dec 8 #4
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 8 #41
SheltieLover Dec 8 #49
onenote Dec 8 #56
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 8 #57
Fullduplexxx Dec 8 #59
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 8 #60
Fullduplexxx Dec 8 #61
Chainfire Dec 8 #62
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 8 #64
PTWB Dec 8 #3
Goodheart Dec 8 #5
DemocratSinceBirth Dec 8 #11
Fullduplexxx Dec 8 #7
LiberalFighter Dec 8 #29
Chin music Dec 8 #10
yardwork Dec 8 #37
Chin music Dec 8 #51
yardwork Dec 8 #52
PoliticAverse Dec 8 #6
secondwind Dec 8 #8
Wounded Bear Dec 8 #16
Kaleva Dec 8 #34
yardwork Dec 8 #38
ananda Dec 8 #9
Chin music Dec 8 #12
Goodheart Dec 8 #13
SoCalNative Dec 8 #19
RockRaven Dec 8 #28
sweetloukillbot Dec 8 #31
LanternWaste Dec 8 #50
True Blue American Dec 8 #14
mia Dec 8 #15
Drunken Irishman Dec 8 #17
Wounded Bear Dec 8 #18
Hokie Dec 8 #20
Stand and Fight Dec 8 #21
Roisin Ni Fiachra Dec 8 #27
Drunken Irishman Dec 8 #35
obamanut2012 Dec 8 #43
obnoxiousdrunk Dec 8 #44
Post removed Dec 8 #47
elleng Dec 8 #22
Cha Dec 8 #26
Chin music Dec 8 #30
Deacon Blue Dec 8 #23
arlyellowdog Dec 8 #25
StarfishSaver Dec 8 #32
Grins Dec 8 #36
obamanut2012 Dec 8 #39
MillenialDemLXXXIII Dec 8 #42
obamanut2012 Dec 8 #45
patricia92243 Dec 8 #40
hlthe2b Dec 8 #46
TwilightZone Dec 8 #48
walkingman Dec 8 #53
Codeine Dec 8 #54
onenote Dec 8 #55
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 8 #58
yellowcanine Dec 8 #63
brooklynite Dec 8 #65

Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:10 PM

1. It's gonna get shut down real quick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bearsfootball516 (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:11 PM

2. Meaning what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:22 PM

24. Meaning something like this...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #24)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:28 PM

33. Nice!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bearsfootball516 (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:11 PM

4. Why are they even taking it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fullduplexxx (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:46 PM

41. They have to hear it. Lawsuits between states are under their original jurisdiction,

meaning that they are the trial court and not an appellate court that has the discretion to grant or deny review, as in most other cases.
This is the DU member formerly known as The Velveteen Ocelot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:00 PM

49. Ty for clarifying

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:10 PM

56. They have discretion to dismiss the case without a hearing.

They don't have discretion not to docket it. But they don't really have that discretion with respect to any case that is filed with them in a procedurally proper fashion.

Docketing it means nothing from a substantive standpoint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:15 PM

57. Yes, they can do that, in effect a summary judgment.

They just can't deny certiorari as with most cases. But it's correct to say that docketing means only that they accepted the filing.
This is the DU member formerly known as The Velveteen Ocelot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:18 PM

59. Thank you ...nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fullduplexxx (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:20 PM

60. Just be aware that "hearing" the case doesn't necessarily mean a full trial on the merits.

What I'm betting is that they will dismiss the case for lack of standing. That would still be hearing it because they would effectively be deciding it (by making it go away).
This is the DU member formerly known as The Velveteen Ocelot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #60)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:22 PM

61. Thankyou for explaining that ....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:30 PM

62. So, is that why it was couched in terms of Texas suing the other states?

I watched a lot of Perry Mason, but I am a plumber.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chainfire (Reply #62)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:35 PM

64. Exactly.

There are a very few kinds of cases that can be taken directly to the Supreme Court without having to go through any other layers of appeals, and lawsuits between states (these are usually matters like border disputes or water pollution) are among them. The real reason, though, was probably because indicted Texas AG Paxton wants a pardon.
This is the DU member formerly known as The Velveteen Ocelot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:11 PM

3. That just means they filed the paperwork correctly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:11 PM

5. Are you sure about that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:13 PM

11. 100%

All it means is the case was properly filed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:12 PM

7. Texas has no standing to sue over other state's elections

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fullduplexxx (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:24 PM

29. Yep! How many states will want to get involved in Texas government? Hmm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #3)


Response to Chin music (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:43 PM

37. In fact, I doubt the paperwork is correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #37)


Response to Chin music (Reply #51)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:04 PM

52. Jesus take the wheel!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:12 PM

6. Good. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:13 PM

8. This is getting tiring... it's like playing whack-a-mole with the Supreme Court......




Cannot wait until that bastard is out of OUR HOUSE!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to secondwind (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:15 PM

16. Sports analogy. It's like watching the 4th quarter of a football game...

and the losing team somehow has 500 time outs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wounded Bear (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:34 PM

34. Lol!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wounded Bear (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:44 PM

38. That's a good analogy!

All but the diehard fans have lost interest and retired to the deck for more beer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:13 PM

9. It says nothing about how they will rule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #9)


Response to ananda (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:14 PM

13. Who is Steve Vladeck? I hope he's right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:17 PM

19. More info

Stephen Vladeck is the Charles Alan Wright Chair in Federal Courts at the University of Texas School of Law, where he specializes in national security law, especially with relation to the prosecution of war crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:24 PM

28. Co-host of the National Security Law podcast (a sibling of the Lawfare podcast)

Also a law professor at U of Texas. Expert in war crime/terrorism type law.

Occasional contributing talking head on CNN.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:26 PM

31. More importantly, why is OP citing an obvious right-wing source? nt

This is the DU member formerly known as sweetloukillbot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:00 PM

50. You don't have to hope. You can research this one on your own.

The relevant and objective information of what 'docketing a case' means in regards to formal court proceedings is readily available via hundreds of various search engines. It's even been spelled out for you in this very thread to allow you assistance in your diligent, forthcoming research.

Or, you can simply continue to repeat "I hope he/she/they/you are right" over and over.

It's your dime.




"Literally..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:15 PM

14. Chris Krebs sued the Trump campaign and Joe DeGenova.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:16 PM

17. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:16 PM

18. They should put it first on their agenda...on Feb 1, 2021.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:19 PM

20. Being docketed means it was filed or in other words nothing

Orly Taitz got a bunch of Birther bullshit cases docketed FFS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:19 PM

21. Concerned, are ya? Thanks for that.

This is the DU member formerly known as Stand and Fight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stand and Fight (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:23 PM

27. ....



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stand and Fight (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:42 PM

35. So many Susan Collins here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stand and Fight (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:47 PM

43. yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stand and Fight (Reply #21)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:48 PM

44. O/P not getting

the answers he/she was looking for. Sad ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obnoxiousdrunk (Reply #44)


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:20 PM

22. You are correct, it's on the docket.

PA replied. 'Update (1006ET): The state of Pennsylvania has replied to the Texas lawsuit, arguing that it doesn't actually address Act 77 - a 2019 statute which allows voters to cast mail-in ballots for any reason.

Pennsylvania also argues that Texas doesn't articulate how 'massive disenfranchisement' of voters by tossing out the results of the election 'would accord with the Due Process Clause, which requires the counting of votes cast in reasonable reliance on existing election rules,' and that the case at hand wouldn't result in a 'circuit split' - when two or more different circuit courts of appeals might rule differently on the same legal issue (and is one of the factors the Supreme Court uses when deciding to take cases).

PA is also arguing that Texas, or anyone, has had since 2019 to object to Act 77, which violates the 'doctrine of laches.' . .

From the filing:
*This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant Statesí election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizensí vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.

Texas was able to approach the Supreme Court because Article III grants it status as the 'court of first impression' where it has original jurisdiction, such as when two states are in dispute, according to the report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:23 PM

26. TY for that, Ellen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #22)


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:22 PM

23. Paxton is A Ass

I bet the petition was in Crayolas on a Big Chief tablet. What a party hack, in a state long run by one partyís hacks. Absent any competition or meaningful media coverage, they get lazy and stupid. And they get away with governance malpractice, benignly neglecting horrible abuses while figuring out what they will fuck up next. 30 years (and counting) of this Gooey Fresh Bullshit sure is getting old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:23 PM

25. It's the type of case

Itís between states so it doesnít have to go to lower courts. It takes a lot of gull to file this case. But, I was happy to see that members of the House spoke up after the 2016 election and other elections. Itís a reminder of how horrible we felt in 2016 and the joy in knowing how miserable the Trumpers must be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:28 PM

32. A case being "docketed" doesn't mean anything. It just means that the filing was recorded.

It doesn't mean the case will be heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:42 PM

36. Lists 6 states. ALL 6 have solid GOP legislatures.

So much for Republican governance...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:45 PM

39. Please quit posting doombait like this

You have literally no idea they will hear the case. It's only been docketed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:46 PM

42. +1 Obamanut2012

Also, this OP should be deleted as it is trafficking in demonstrably false information from a right-wing source no less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MillenialDemLXXXIII (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:48 PM

45. JFC I just saw it was Zero Hedge

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:45 PM

40. Trump said we would be tired of winning. He is right. I'm tired

but exhilarated by winning. I just wish Trump would quit giving us so many opportunities to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:56 PM

46. You ARE wrong. Nothing about docketing means it will be heard. See Vladeck on this

Once more for the people in the back:

#SCOTUS "docketing" a case (like Texas's preposterous new original suit against PA, GA, MI, and WI) is the Court saying "you have properly filed your suit," and nothing more.








Further: See today's SCOTUS suit, which, though docketed, WAS NOT heard, but rather unceremoniously thrown out.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 05:59 PM

48. Find better sources.

Zero Hedge is a far-right site that has been black-listed by Google, PayPal, Facebook and many others.

Even Reddit banned them. You know how nutty one has to be to get banned on Reddit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:05 PM

53. Obviously nothing more than a political ploy to garner support from the nutjobs in Texas. Paxton

is a criminal himself but unless the people in Texas quit electing/re-electing these idiots this is what you get in Texas government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:07 PM

54. The fuck are you posting Zerohedge bullshit

 

around here for? Garbage source for garbage minds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:07 PM

55. I wish people who don't understand SCOTUS procedure wouldn't act like they do.

Docketing is a ministerial act that does NOT mean that the Court will hear the case. While Texas et al are arguing that the Court has to hear the case, they acknowledge that the Court's precedents do not support that argument and that the Court would have to overturn decades of precedent to conclude that they lack the discretion to decide whether or not to hear the case. Only Thomas has argued that such precedent should be overturned, so its unlikely that there would be a majority to do so.

The OP should edit the subject of their post to remove the statement that the court will hear the case. Docketing the case doesn't mean that at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #55)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:18 PM

58. I'm betting that they'll dismiss the case for lack of standing,

which is "hearing" the case in the sense that they are making a decision. There will not be a full hearing on the merits because there aren't any merits.
This is the DU member formerly known as The Velveteen Ocelot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:32 PM

63. Doesn't mean the case will be heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goodheart (Original post)

Tue Dec 8, 2020, 06:44 PM

65. Wrong about what?

Do you really imagine that the SC will intervene?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread