State of Texas AG files suit on four other states to stop election results

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,358
8,447
126
does no one ever see if something is under discussion anymore?

 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Why? The bar for injunctive relief is higher than whether or not to hear a case.

Without injunctive relief the case becomes moot today, the safe harbor date. State certified results are locked in & the trash ejector cycles automatically. The only remaining challenge is in WI which can't change the outcome of the EC, anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi and Zorba

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,461
996
126
It's on the docket


and joined by 7 other States.
So what? This suit has even less merit than the one the SCOTUS snuffed today. It's also not timely, given that today is the safe harbor date for state certified results.

Which is important because the court essentially used the safe harbor law to get to their conclusion in Bush v Gore. The trump humpers like to cite Bush v Gore in these filings. However Bush v Gore was essentially a one off and it actually works against their arguments. Essentially midnight tonight snuffs out legal challenges and SCOTUS won’t touch anything if they follow their own precedent.

Theres so many ways for them to dismiss this case and no ways for them to give Paxton what he’s asking for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi and BUTCH1

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
Because the plaintiffs are about to suffer irreparable harm with the finalization of PA’s certification. They say as much in their filing. Regardless, there are no actual bars for either injunctions or cert for SCOTUS, they can do whatever they want.

Again, if you think the Supreme Court is going to deny an injunction here and deny their request for cert but grant some new and improved future one based on the same facts and arguments you are dreaming.

I will add: probability of success on the merits is a key element in a request for an injunction. If your injunction is denied 9-0, it means the court thinks you have no chance to succeed in the underlying case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,037
2,615
136
Texas has no legal standing.

They cannot claim they are harmed by changes to election rules anymore than california can claim they are harmed by abbotts emergency ballot box proclamation or texas's restrictive policies to polling places and voter registration.


Purely a political stunt with tax payer money.
 
Last edited:
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Which is important because the court essentially used the safe harbor law to get to their conclusion in Bush v Gore. The trump humpers like to cite Bush v Gore in these filings. However Bush v Gore was essentially a one off and it actually works against their arguments. Essentially midnight tonight snuffs out legal challenges and SCOTUS won’t touch anything if they follow their own precedent.

Theres so many ways for them to dismiss this case and no ways for them to give Paxton what he’s asking for.
Sure there is, the 1876 precedent making Rutherford B. Hayes the President.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,017
8,545
136
Texas AG is under FBI investigation at present...surely not trying to showboat for a pardon.

Bingo ... The Attorney General, who’s under indictment for felon securities fraud and recently caught up in an entirely separate scandal trying to obstruct the investigation of one of his campaign donors, filed this suit. Notably the solicitor general, who normally would argue the state’s case before the Supreme Court, kept his name off the filing. Nothing to see here. Other than ANOTHER attempt to subvert democracy.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,017
8,545
136
Because the plaintiffs are about to suffer irreparable harm with the finalization of PA’s certification. They say as much in their filing. Regardless, there are no actual bars for either injunctions or cert for SCOTUS, they can do whatever they want.

Again, if you think the Supreme Court is going to deny an injunction here and deny their request for cert but grant some new and improved future one based on the same facts and arguments you are dreaming.

I assuming the AG of Texas isn’t dumb enough to not see the problems with “I don’t like the way other states ran their elections so I’m going to sue and ask SCOTUS to force those state to appoint electors the way my state wants them to be appointed”. But, "pardon me"...I could be wrong. He could be dumb enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,757
2,533
126
Bingo ... The Attorney General, who’s under indictment for felon securities fraud and recently caught up in an entirely separate scandal trying to obstruct the investigation of one of his campaign donors, filed this suit. Notably the solicitor general, who normally would argue the state’s case before the Supreme Court, kept his name off the filing. Nothing to see here. Other than ANOTHER attempt to subvert democracy.

This (plus the lack of legal standing). Coincidentally 60 Minutes had an episode on this clown this Sunday (which didn't mention this lawsuit). Truly is the scum of the earth-scammed his friends and relatives into a shady stock deal he had an undisclosed interest in, plead guilty to a civil violation and got a slap on the wrist ($1000 as I recall). Then he got elected AG and did the same thing again. He was indicted while sitting as AG, is now awaiting trial-facing 99 year sentence. Then the good people of TX reelected him (shades of Marion Berry but on the right). More recently seven of his top aides signed a letter saying he had committed other crimes, which crimes are now under investigation.

It boggles my mind how people keep electing the same scum over and over again because they are on my team.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,939
7,459
136
This (plus the lack of legal standing). Coincidentally 60 Minutes had an episode on this clown this Sunday (which didn't mention this lawsuit). Truly is the scum of the earth-scammed his friends and relatives into a shady stock deal he had an undisclosed interest in, plead guilty to a civil violation and got a slap on the wrist ($1000 as I recall). Then he got elected AG and did the same thing again. He was indicted while sitting as AG, is now awaiting trial-facing 99 year sentence. Then the good people of TX reelected him (shades of Marion Berry but on the right). More recently seven of his top aides signed a letter saying he had committed other crimes, which crimes are now under investigation.

It boggles my mind how people keep electing the same scum over and over again because they are on my team.


It's Texas, where Repubs feel so safe about their hold on that state the first victim to fall to their whims is their discretion. They are also indifferent toward caring about what the rest of the nation thinks/feels about that. Even if they lose control of their state gov't the attitudes of those Repubs will never change, they'll just find a way to cheat their way back in.


edit - grammar
 
Last edited: