• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Texas Republicans try to invalidate 127,000 ballots

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Further extreme eww, judge has openly and deliberately left the issue wide open for continued litigation, and has back-door substantially granted what plaintiffs were seeking even while officially ruling they have no standing:

"Re: certain pending 5th Circuit appeal, Hanen says if he did find GOP had standing, he would likely halt drive-thru voting tomorrow. He orders Harris County to keep all drive-thru memory cards separate in case higher court intervenes."
 
In the Judge’s defense he also said he would deny the injunction even if upon appeal the 5th circuit found they had standing.

Further extreme eww, judge has openly and deliberately left the issue wide open for continued litigation, and has back-door substantially granted what plaintiffs were seeking even while officially ruling they have no standing:

"Re: certain pending 5th Circuit appeal, Hanen says if he did find GOP had standing, he would likely halt drive-thru voting tomorrow. He orders Harris County to keep all drive-thru memory cards separate in case higher court intervenes."

These seem like opposite conclusions.
 
Looks like the apparent discrepancy is due to the judge distinguishing between pre-election day drive through voting and election day drive through voting. Presumably with the goal of putting a big asterisk by the votes to give the GOP room to maneuver.

Why does the federal district court have any say in interpreting state law? I thought state law went through state courts, and then from a state supreme court to the US supreme court.
 
Why does the federal district court have any say in interpreting state law? I thought state law went through state courts, and then from a state supreme court to the US supreme court.

There are both federal and state law claims being made by these plaintiffs.

Federal courts can also adjudicate pure state law claims under diversity jurisdiction, though that is not what happened here.
 
Looks like the apparent discrepancy is due to the judge distinguishing between pre-election day drive through voting and election day drive through voting. Presumably with the goal of putting a big asterisk by the votes to give the GOP room to maneuver.


This explains it a little better-


It's mostly gibberish. "Plaintiffs are denied standing, but if the 5th circuit rules otherwise, today, then I'll rule against more drive thru voting tomorrow. Oh, and votes already cast count, but keep them separate because reasons."

If he didn't have the balls to throw out votes the Texas SCOTUS ruled to be valid I seriously doubt that the 5th circuit will, either. He keeps some right wing cred with the dance.
 
Well that's a bit of welcome news, sounds like the judge was able to seperate his personal views from carrying out the law. Pity he felt the need to comment, guy wants to cover his ass though.
 
This country has the most fucked election system on the planet. I thought we'd have learned after the Bush/Gore bullshit. It's glaringly obvious that we need a single federal system, so we can avoid having to deal with this fuckery from red state yokels every single election.
 
They don't have to be right to take a shot at it.
Perhaps we should have a system in place to decide if a grievance is valid? We could call it a "Court".

It's a despicable act to attempt to invalidate the votes of 127,000 honest Americans who availed themselves of drive thru voting. You know that. That's why they held back the suit until after the voting had occurred. It's over 1% of the anticipated vote total & could well swing the election. The GOP will lose their minds if it does.
 
They don't have to be right to take a shot at it.
Perhaps we should have a system in place to decide if a grievance is valid? We could call it a "Court".
I must have missed where anyone said they couldn’t sue. They are just reprehensible human beings for doing it. People shouldn’t forget what sort of people make up the Republican Party.
 
I must have missed where anyone said they couldn’t sue. They are just reprehensible human beings for doing it. People shouldn’t forget what sort of people make up the Republican Party.

I'm trying to think back to all the other elections I've partaken in and I'm wondering if there was ever a time when people were more nonchalant about voter suppression or the possibility of votes that met all the legal requirements not counting. I seem to recall some talk during the Bush/gore election but it was about counting more votes (military overseas if I remember correctly).

I just don't get how any patriotic American wouldn't get upset and angry if any person, let alone a political party, was actively trying to invalidate peoples vote. Like if you have any concern for democracy how could you support any entity that engages in this behavior? The lack of concern from some people on this forum is baffling to me.
 
I'm trying to think back to all the other elections I've partaken in and I'm wondering if there was ever a time when people were more nonchalant about voter suppression or the possibility of votes that met all the legal requirements not counting. I seem to recall some talk during the Bush/gore election but it was about counting more votes (military overseas if I remember correctly).

I just don't get how any patriotic American wouldn't get upset and angry if any person, let alone a political party, was actively trying to invalidate peoples vote. Like if you have any concern for democracy how could you support any entity that engages in this behavior? The lack of concern from some people on this forum is baffling to me.
In the 2000 election, they counted military ballots that didn’t meet the requirements for a legal ballot having been post marked after the election date. The two campaigns chose not to contest the unlawful ballots even though they might have turned the election results in Florida. In retrospect one wonders how many military personnel died who might still be alive if the Gore campaign had contested those late ballots.
 
In the 2000 election, they counted military ballots that didn’t meet the requirements for a legal ballot having been post marked after the election date. The two campaigns chose not to contest the unlawful ballots even though they might have turned the election results in Florida. In retrospect one wonders how many military personnel died who might still be alive if the Gore campaign had contested those late ballots.

Man, that's one hell of a rear-looking perspective. Like, mic-drop worthy
 
Last edited:
plaintiff and all-around shitbird "dr" steven hotze has a twitter. and posts completely normal things to it.

FFS, can someone please explain to me how population reduction, which would increase the bargaining power of the lower classes, would benefit the uber-wealthy elite? And oh no, a forced vaccine microchip to track us all! Like that kind of thing is even necessary when we all pay for our smartphones that we carry with us everywhere.
Goddamn these nutters are fucking stupid.
 
FFS, can someone please explain to me how population reduction, which would increase the bargaining power of the lower classes, would benefit the uber-wealthy elite? And oh no, a forced vaccine microchip to track us all! Like that kind of thing is even necessary when we all pay for our smartphones that we carry with us everywhere.
Goddamn these nutters are fucking stupid.
That is one deranged twitter feed. Holy hell!
 
plaintiff and all-around shitbird "dr" steven hotze has a twitter. and posts completely normal things to it.

Maybe he and the sex-with-dream/demons doctor can get together and swap stories.
I think she's from Texas too, right?

Yep Houston

Hey, this hotze fool is from Houston too.
Maybe the two of them know each other.
 
Back
Top