Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ThisIsMyPaAccount t1_iqxihcj wrote

Reply to comment by -Motor- in U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge to Pennsylvania electoral map by Strategic_Prussian

This is a seperate issue. Chuds just kept throwing shit at the wall hoping they can gerrymanders the state harder and lost in the state Supreme court and got thrown out of the US Supreme court

27

-Motor- t1_iqxiop4 wrote

Your missing my point. This supreme court is actively trying to appear a-political by granting wine reviews while rejecting others, but they save up for the bombshell fringe cases

44

ThisIsMyPaAccount t1_iqxoatd wrote

> This supreme court is actively trying to appear a-political by granting wine reviews while rejecting others, but they save up for the bombshell fringe cases

Literally how the supreme court has run since marybury vs madison. In case you didnt know, the supreme court is part of the judicial branch of the government and thus political by definition. Im not as stupid as the people you are trying to trick with you post.

Also i never said anything otherwise about moore vs harper. I know what it means and i know what is going to happen because of it. go bark up another tree chud. I dont care that you are trying to equate the 2 totally separate issues with each other.

Not to mention YOU missed MY point. This was taken to state court because the state is losing a seat and republicans were crying because now the map is only like 3% gerrymandered to their favor instead of way more that they want. They lost in the state courts and thought they could pull a fast one because the courts were stacked with trump activist judges. Even then it got shot down.

The point you are making is totally unrelated outside of the fact that it has to do with election mapping. Moore v Harper says there is some made up idea that the state legislative branch can do whatever they want in an election and are trying to get the prior mentioned activist judges to give them carte blanche to change the results if they dont like them.

−29

-Motor- t1_iqxorbf wrote

I can understand why you hide behind a pa politics special/separate account.

You should correct the error in your last paragraph. "State executive branch"

22

im_at_work_now t1_iqxrku2 wrote

Pretty sure that posting is not the same as hiding, but you do you.

But first, you should realize that you clearly don't understand the case. It is very clearly about the legislature's ability to draw maps without any checks against them (barring courts from overruling legislature, AKA eliminating checks and balances).

−9

jkman61494 t1_iqygi52 wrote

I think you’re missing the point where SCOTUS will make it legal to end voting

Biden or whoever wins a presidential race and the PA legislature doesn’t like it? They’ll just LEGALLY be able to say a Republican wins the “election”.

That is when America ends and a guerrilla styled civil war begins. And the military industrial complex, much like a failed nation state we’d use to snicker at on the evening news will be the decider of who wins. Unless they of course take that power for themselves

8

Buffmin t1_ir5ncgi wrote

>Biden or whoever wins a presidential race and the PA legislature doesn’t like it? They’ll just LEGALLY be able to say a Republican wins the “election”.

Yup. The gqp is a minority party they cannot win fairly.

They're going this route as a desperate attempt to remain viable and in power.

2