Dissent by Justice Thomas in election case draws fire for revisiting baseless Trump fraud claims

Fortunately, that didn't happen in the most secure election in our history....

The primary election mistakes in 2020 were set before Election Day. For instance, any state not allowing early ballot counting had better get on the ball... Even freaking Florida figured that one out...

 

1. OK. However, if true, how does that mean that is the reason Biden won? Those extra ballots could certainly show a choice for Trump.

2. I haven't heard anyone say that it shouldn't be researched and scrutinized. I have always thought this should be laid to rest.

3. What does the longevity of the USPS and voting booths have to do with it?

Clearly, we need to find a suitable way for ballots to be cast without this constant back-n-forth about things being shady. In fact, I don't see how they could ignore all this and not be better prepared for future elections.

 

My experience with voting my whole life (with the exception of last election because I filled out my mail in ballot and dropped it off in ballot box) is its very secure.
You have to show ID, and then you go into a booth and they even close a curtain around you
Why was this so secure in the first place if it could have ALWAYS been done by mail?
Why were people receiving duplicate ballots? Very easy for someone to die after their ballot is sent and someone else fills it out on their behalf.
Mail in ballot system is EXTREMELY flawed
I get that it was driven by a pandemic and this was the safe way to do it this time around, but still very very flawed nonetheless

 

Mail in votes should be the exception by far.

 

Again, I'm not saying the system is flawless. I am saying that there is no way to determine which ballots are "real" and which one are duplicates or how many of those were for a specific candidate. And, that means EVERY election has been flawed in some way.

I also believe that Trump had much to do with it by sowing the seed that he could only lose if the other side cheats, having DeJoy mess around with mailboxes and overtime and generally being narcissistic (believing that it's impossible for some to dislike him).

 

This little snippet makes no sense. Is Thomas dissenting on how they ruled, or why they decided not to take the case

The case in Pennsylvania was wether to allow the counting of absentee ballots form 9 days to three. But the challenge was not on the counting of the ballots, it was on the validity fo the state SC to overrule the law in place. It would in no way change the vote. So what is Thomas is saying ? is it "why are we not talking about this as a constitutional challenge if thats what the SC exists for"

 

Sounds like McConnell "logic."

 

Their reason matters for nothing. It was unconstitutional.

 

I don't pay much attention to who posts what. So don't get offended when I ask if someone here is trying to reveal his ignorance or just trying to keep a thread lively that might have died after one reply?
Let me add some points to challenge the apparent ignorance.
Roberts has consistently voted on whatever makes life easier for judges. This is consistent.
If Thomas was a Trump fan he would have retired in 2019.
The Roe versus Wade decision was merged with another case to guarantee victory for the weaker of the 2 cases. Even so, the right decision would have been to strike down the 2 laws so states can do better writing laws thereafter.
That's what we need now.
If Republicans need everyone to show up only on election day to win, because Democrats are too lazy to leave home, and Democrats need a ballot mailed to them and someone to come by and pick it up for them we have a very faulty country.

 

On twitter, some folks mentioned that his dissent was the equivalent of him whipping slave in the fields... Democrats really have no shame anymore.

 

Said nobody officially at any time...

And reasons do matter... if they didn't have a valid reason, I think it's likely more than 3 SCOTUS would have taken this up for argument...

What's your boy Brett saying about this issue?? Handmaid lady?? They couldn't even vote to hear the case??

What does that tell you?

 

It is quite simple. If there is any rationale laying around anywhere, justices with any concern for their legacy wouldn't touch such a high profile controversial case with such monumental implications with a light-year long pole. Alito implied that PA was self-evidently unconstitutional by issuing his injunction like order.

 

Alito's "injunction like order" was merely to separate out those ballots.... any first year law student would recognize that necessity.

Also, this really isn't a "high profile controversial case with monumental implications", since nothing that might have happened here would have affected Penn, much less the overall election.

I'm personally a bit surprised the SCOTUS didn't hear it, but the fact that they didn't (as moot), and didn't take it up when it wasn't moot, tells me the bulk of the court feels the State Supreme Court had the power to make this very common sense solution to an impending Constitutional problem of disenfranchisement by a poorly written law.

 

states refused to abide by their own election laws.

it is within uncle thomas' interpretation.

 

They made no statement or ruling why they refused to hear the case(s), though they might have commented in their refusal, I dunno. By poorly written law are you referring to the US Constitution???

 

No, I'm referring to the Penn absentee ballot law/deadline that was called a "mismatch" with the current standards of the USPS, which may or may not have been made worse by DeJoy and COVID in 2020 (they almost certainly were)...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/postal-service-pennsylvanias-mail-in-ballot-laws-election-issues/

If you are basing a law on a service provided by an outside source, I recommend you get approval from that service

 

I think that regardless of how dismissive the left is, there are millions of people, hundreds of claims and accusations of fraud, and the Justice realizes that their failure to act on election integrity does nothing to instill confidence.

Sorry, but in this country you don't get to say "shut up, nothing happened, look the other way, we ignore will just ignore you". That screams of coverup and a desire to not address potential issues.

I personally have major issues and concerns with the election and the accuracy of the votes.

 

As opposed to the party that literally buys votes?

laughable.

 

~ Thomas gets free pillows. He's obviously been bribed. It's a conspiracy . .. ´

 

Finally a justice with some sense!!! What happened to the rest of them?

 

That may be true, though I don't understand why it evidently was not a mismatch before 2020. In any event the PA supreme court had no authority nor jurisdiction to "fix" it.

 

It wasn't a mismatch before 2020, because it was made in 2019.

You keep trying here, but the quicksand isn't giving you up.... The Pa Supreme court doesn't have the jurisdiction to rule on the validity of Pa laws, you say?? Do you not know that is essentially the freaking definition of a state supreme court??

SNIP
In the United States, a state supreme court (known by other names in some states) is the highest court in the state judiciary of a U.S. state. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts.
ENDSNIP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_supreme_court

That law was temporarily judged to be a problem for the 2020 election and they made a slight and completely non-controversial adjustment.

It's over and neither candidate was impacted in any way... rest easy.

The interesting thing to watch is if those deadlines will now be officially adjusted by the State legislature, because failure to do so will probably result in similar actions in 2022 or 2024....

 

They do not have the jurisdiction nor the authority to make and decree unconstitutional changes to the legislature established voting process.

 

OK, then if this is such a clear violation of the US Constitution, why do you suppose Beer-man and the Handmaid gave it a pass? Aren't they the staunch originalists you were promised??

But I do agree with Thomas that it's a mistake to ignore this issue, because other common sense adjustments might be needed in the future to correct short-sighted legislatures...

I suspect the Pa Supreme Court would have been ruled in the right here, but now we'll never know...

 

Brett and Amy are obviously deep state secret AntiFa plants!

I think the reason they didn’t want to get involved in State law is due to it setting precedent. Seeing that many people are pushing Biden to push for federal control over State elections (such as requiring early voting, ballot box accessibility, voter requirements and even mail in voting) they might want to avoid any cause that could be used to push a new VRA through.