High court declines to take up Sanders supporters' lawsuit (from 2016)
Source: Yahoo (AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) The Supreme Court is declining to revive a lawsuit by supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders who sued the Democratic National Committee in 2016 over claims officials improperly tipped the scales for Hillary Clinton during the nominating process. The justices said Monday they would not take up the lawsuit. As is usual the court did not comment in turning away the case.
The lawsuit was filed after leaked DNC emails suggested Democratic party officials had favored Clinton over the Vermont senator during the primaries. The emails were posted on the document disclosure website WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks did not say who provided the material, but 12 Russian military intelligence officers were ultimately indicted in connection with the DNC hack and hacking of the Clinton presidential campaign.
According to special counsel Robert Muellers investigation, the release was part of a sweeping conspiracy by Russia to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election.
DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation following the leaks. The lawsuit by Sanders supporters was dismissed at an early stage and an appeals court had upheld the dismissal.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/high-court-declines-sanders-supporters-135358135.html
videohead5
(2,172 posts)What they think the DNC did that got Hillary 4 million more votes than Bernie. The DNC did not run any ads for Hillary even if they wanted to they could not they were broke. Bernie even had more money than Hillary. The DNC had very little influence over voters.
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)I wish this was the end of this foolishness, but I'm sure the conspiracy theories will continue.
bucolic_frolic
(43,173 posts)They clearly don't intend to be an arbiter of state election policy and don't want a lot to do with ruling within parties. If they went down that path it would open an endless stream of litigation about procedures etc. I know it's not what a lot of us want to hear, but it is practical.
LiberalFighter
(50,942 posts)Fullduplexxx
(7,863 posts)onetexan
(13,041 posts)Sloumeau
(2,657 posts)From more than a year before the Democratic National Convention, Hillary always led in the polls. Bernie also had big problems winning non-Caucus states and those states that had any significant percentage of people of color. Bernie was never going to win the 2016 Democratic Primary for President.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)lapucelle
(18,265 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)29 The district courts order of dismissal is affirmed, but the case is remanded so that the district court can amend its order consistent with our opinion. The order should dismiss the fraud, negligent misrepresentation, CPPA, and unjust enrichment claimswhich fail on the meritswith prejudice, and dismiss the negligence and fiduciary duty claimswhich fail for lack of standingwithout prejudice.
Response to ehrnst (Reply #9)
Gothmog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cha
(297,261 posts)Again!
Sloumeau
(2,657 posts)Cha
(297,261 posts)Thank you!
betsuni
(25,532 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)(That's all, just a pregnant "well" with ellipses. Nothing more needs to be said for obvious reasons, so I'll just leave it at that.)
betsuni
(25,532 posts)Im still salty about it though
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)STILL trying to do harm to Democrats and Hillary, amazing.
Stallion
(6,474 posts)JI7
(89,250 posts)Gothmog
(145,288 posts)This was a fun soap opera to watch. The petition and the briefs from the plaintiffs were dreck and were fun to laugh at. The concept that a campaign donor qualifies as a consumer under the DC consumer protection law was truly a stupid argument
Here are some of the threads that I have fun
https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100210544462
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212633275
There were some JPR posters who were nominal plaintiffs in this bogus lawsuit that the idiots on JPR really defended this bogus piece of shit lawsuit
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028980417
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212635213
I really enjoyed laughing at the JPR posters who thought that this silly lawsuit had merit.
betsuni
(25,532 posts)Entertaining.
Gothmog
(145,288 posts)I understand that some of the idiots who post on JPR were nominal plaintiffs in this really stupid lawsuit. I was amused that anyone would take this piece of dreck seriously
betsuni
(25,532 posts)I remember a plaintive request on JPR for people to help comb through hacked DNC emails because there MUST be something bad there, THERE MUST BE! Laff riot.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Ahh... good times, eh? What fun.