SCOTUS DECLINES MORE ELECTION CASES
SCOTUS scoots past Penn. election law case
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a handful of cases related to the 2020 election, including disputes from Pennsylvania that had deeply divided the justices just before the election.
The cases the justices rejected involved election challenges filed by former President Donald Trump and his allies in five states President Joe Biden won: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
The justices’ decision not to hear the cases ends months of legal wrangling. The court had previously taken no action in those cases and in January had turned away pleas that the cases be fast-tracked, again suggesting the justices were not interested in hearing them.
Some of the justices, however, had strong feelings about the court’s decision not to hear two cases from Pennsylvania that had been particularly contentious in the battleground state. The cases involved an appeal of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision requiring election officials to receive and count mailed-in ballots that arrived up to three days after the election. Three of the nine justices said they would have heard the case, which would not have affected the election’s outcome.
Justice Clarence Thomas called the cases an “ideal opportunity” to address an important question whether state lawmakers or state courts get the last word about the manner in which federal elections are carried out. And he called it “befuddling” and “inexplicable” that his colleagues were declining to weigh in.
Sandy Rios, director of governmental affairs said: “Justice [Clarence] Thomas makes the point [in his dissent that] this is going to happen again – and with H.R. 1 on the plate … this signals that the court is not willing to do anything. [H.R. 1 is a] horrible, horrible takeover of the election system by the feds, controlled then by the leftist government that you’re watching taking more and more power day by day. It’s coming up probably this week for a vote; something has to stop them.”
“[I suspect] Justice [John] Roberts and others on that court are really afraid that the Democrats are going to expand the court and they will lose their power – and this is their way of saying [to the Democrats] ‘You don’t need to [do that]’. Because why would they expand it [if] they have the court they need? They have this wonderful court that rules in their favor. And now with Amy Coney Barrett, [Brett] Kavanaugh, [Chief Justice] Roberts already are ruling with the liberal justices, why would you expand the court?”
DAWG SAYS: I DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE BUT APPEARS SCOTUS IS TAKING A HANDS OFF APPROACH TO MANY THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DECIDED.
ARE THEY CONCERND ABOUT COURT PACKING IF THEY DON’T?
HAVE THEY BEEN INTIMIDATED?
