It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Replies have just been received and entered on the Supreme Court docket in Kelly's case against the State of Pennsylvania.
Petitioners ask this Court to undertake one of the most dramatic, disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the Republic. No court has ever issued an order nullifying a governor’s certification of presidential election results. And for
good reason: “Once the door is opened to judicial invalidation of presidential election results, it will be awfully hard to close that door again. . . . The loss of public trust in our constitutional order resulting from the exercise of this kind of judicial power would be incalculable.”
originally posted by: BastogneFoxHole
I never thought Obama didn't win.
That is why we got Trump. I am a Trump supporter.
With Biden, we have witnessed a modern coup.
Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for the Court to consider them. Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court.
Even if this federal court had the authority to order the governor of the state of Wisconsin to certify the results of a national presidential election for any candidate—and the plaintiff has presented no case, statute or constitutional provision providing the court with that authority—doing so would further invalidate and nullify [Feehan]’s vote.
The plaintiff wants Donald J. Trump to be certified as the winner of the Wisconsin election as a result of the plaintiff’s vote. But what he asks is for Donald J. Trump to be certified the winner as a result of judicial fiat.
Granting the relief the plaintiff requests would take the court far outside those limits, and outside the limits of its oath to uphold and defendant the Constitution.