SCOTUS Win for NVPIC

a reply to: Vector99

Nope. Just the facts.

Opinions show up a little bit later.

a reply to: Phage

Well the facts of the matter is the the scotus upheld a ruling that was already in place.

Dumbass judges get overturned all the time, as do entire circuit decisions.

You reported this titled
"SCOTUS Win for NPVIC" literally your title.

How is this a win? It's literally already law.?

a reply to: Vector99

Well the facts of the matter is the the scotus upheld a ruling that was already in place.

Incorrect. They overruled a ruling.

How is this a win?

Because it means that electors must vote according to the law of their state. Contrary to the state of affairs before today's decision.


You made me repeat myself. Twice. Grr.

a reply to: Phage

Incorrect. They overruled a ruling.

Semantics will be the death of you, that literally is them upholding current law as I stated.

Because it means that electors must vote according to the law of their state. You made me repeat myself. Twice.

i made you do nothing. You felt my argument was compelling enough to elicit a response. Don't blame me, blame you for thinking what I say is worth responding to.

a reply to: Vector99

Semantics will be the death of you, that literally is them upholding current law as I stated.

That's not what you said. This is what you said:

Well the facts of the matter is the the scotus upheld a ruling that was already in place.

The prior ruling was that the law was invalid. SCOTUS did not uphold that ruling.

You felt my argument was compelling enough to elicit a response.

Or to keep the thread going. Too bad you don't have anything new to discuss though. That would be better than repeating myself. Again.

That bit about Congress was good.

a reply to: Phage

No, I didn't ever validate the prior judge's ruling

In fact I validated the ruling of scotus in saying that the judge was wrong.

Glad to see you still will never admit to being wrong

a reply to: Vector99

No, I didn't ever validate the prior judge's ruling

It's not up to you to do so. Your opinion holds no legal weight.

In fact I validated the ruling of scotus in saying that the judge was wrong.

I agree that the Appeals Court decision was wrong. But until today's SCOTUS decision an elector could vote any way they wished, without any recourse on the part of the state.

Don't you know that's how the system works?

a reply to: Phage

So you mean to tell me there were zero faithless electors punished in 2016 right?

Because as you say it wasn't law before then? Right?

a reply to: Vector99

So you mean to tell me that you are opining on a case of which you have no knowledge?

Because as you say it wasn't law before then? Right?

Wrong.

a reply to: Phage

How much knowledge do I need? Scotus ruled that states have the right to punish faithless electors?

Did that happen in 2016? At all...anywhere...?

a reply to: Vector99

How much knowledge do I need? Scotus ruled that states have the right to punish faithless electors?

After a lower court said that they cannot.

You really don't know how it works. Here's a nutshell:

Not all laws are legal. For example:

There were once laws on the books that said white men could not marry black women. Lower courts said it was ok (!). It went through the court system and finally (in 1967!) the SCOTUS said, "Nope, can't do that." But until they did, those laws were legal.

In this case, it went the other way. But after that first decision, and until the SCOTUS said "Yep, you can do that", those laws were illegal.

That's how it works. In a nutshell.

a reply to: Phage

So, you're telling me the laws that were already on the books were overturned by the scotus?

a reply to: Vector99

So, you're telling me the laws that were already on the books were overturned by the scotus?

In 1967, yes.

Also in 1964, "Jim Crow" laws.

Also in 2017. Laws which prohibited same sex marriage were ruled illegal.

There are very many examples.

You didn't know this? Seriously? No wonder you have no idea what this decision is about. Hopefully you'll learn something.

a reply to: Phage

Still haven't found that special man, probably won't since I'm not gay (nice dig there, that was impressive)

So, to run through what we've established.

1* SCOTUS overturned a mistaken lower court ruling
2* ?
3* PROFIT!

Did I miss anything?


You edited that post at least 5 times, how cute, sorry not gay.

a reply to: Vector99

You got 1 right.
So far.

a reply to: Phage

There isn't anything past 1

a reply to: Vector99

2* ?
3* PROFIT!

a reply to: Phage

Southpark reference, literally.

a reply to: Vector99

Missed the reference.
I remember the gnomes.

My prediction because when you plan God laughs

Trump will win the popular vote, because deep blue states just saw the left allow a life time of hard work to go down drain in some areas. They don’t want that to come to their doors.

Biden will win the electrical College

Then some of the flyover states will pass the winner take all vote, so they movement gets what they need. So the states are bound to vote for Trump and more craziness starts.