Independent State Legislature Theory crashed and burned with a majority SCOTUS 6:3 decision

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by chelloveck, Jun 28, 2023.


  1. chelloveck

    chelloveck Diabolus Causidicus

    Independent State Legislature Theory crashed and burned with a SCOTUS 6:3 decision (Moore v Harper) which destroys the theory's credibility as a tool for untrammeled interference with future US elections. The Decision can be read at https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-1271_3f14.pdf



    The Moore v Harper SCOTUS decision is probably not popular with former President tRump....and it undermines the legitimacy of the 'fake elector' scheme rolled out by some tRumpist cultists in 2020.

    The decision maintains the State judicial and executive branches' checks and balances against raw legislative branch power which is in furtherance of partisan party political chicanery and self serving abuses of electoral processes.



    On the other hand: Alito, Gorsuch and Thomas, dissented from the majority decision, so the tRumpist, MAGA cultists can take some comfort from that one might suppose.
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2023
  2. 3M-TA3

    3M-TA3 Cold Wet Monkey

    I guess this blows your theory that the current SCOTUS is an arm of the Republican party. The job of SCOTUS is to interpret the Constitution AS WRITTEN in relation to other laws without regard to politics. They have done so.

    While I thought it was shady that the NY courts overrode NY LAW to allow post cutoff date ballots to be counted (imagine if it were Florida and those ballots were all Trump), but I trust the judgement of an Originalist SCOTUS where I NOT trust the judgement of an Activist SCOTUS regardless of how they lean.

    To a true conservative the process IS the ends, as opposed the Left embracing the "ends justify the means". Sorry to spoill your celebration but this is seen as a victory in the battle to prevent the US from becoming a Banana Republic even though to many it would seem a loss.

    If we want the Constitution changed we follow the law and have the Legislature change it and NOT by appointing politically motivated Justices. Same for effectively changing the law by Presidential EO. MAKE CONGRESS DO IT'S JOB.
     
    SB21, BTPost and Yard Dart like this.
  3. hot diggity

    hot diggity Monkey+++ Site Supporter+++

    It's interesting that this was how it was done in North Carolina for a very long time and was never a concern until Republicans became the majority. Not that it makes much difference with a 5-2 Republican majority on the NC Supreme Court.

    Don't forget to bring your photo ID to vote in North Carolina.
     
    SB21 and Yard Dart like this.
  4. Ura-Ki

    Ura-Ki Grampa Monkey

    This was a correct ruling, despite a bunch of stuck up power mad idiots in congress who wrote it and tried to push it on us!
    States Cannot Usurp the National Constitution, they cannot claim preemption and usurp fed statutes of voter or election laws and make up their own bullshit, which OryGun seems to love doing. No, we have a system that spells out what is what, and that's it, yuo don't get to violate that system with out consequences, and here SCOTUS ruled correctly!

    Now, we need to hold states feet to the fire and demand they follow the laws, None of this bullshit Mail In Ballots, and all that, we MUST go back to the way it was originally spelled out, you show up at the certified polling station, you submit your valid I.D. which proves your a citizen in good standing, and you cast your vote with a pin and ink on paper which YOU drop in the ballot box. there is a SHERIFF'S Deputy there to watch the whole process and to then watch the votes HAND CARIED to the counting station, ALL done under strict scrutiny and oversite! NO MORE BULLSHIT!!
     
    3M-TA3 likes this.
  5. SB21

    SB21 Monkey+++

    Heard the other day , Piglosi wants the Supreme Court to have term limits ,, but not congress ,,, go figure that one .
     
    3M-TA3, Ura-Ki and Bandit99 like this.
  6. oil pan 4

    oil pan 4 Monkey+++

    I believe it would take a constitutional amendment to give the supreme court term limits.
     
    3M-TA3 and Ura-Ki like this.
  7. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    I must admit that I am not totally opposed to 'time' limits on a Supreme Court justice just as I am not opposed to term limits for House and Senate members. I wouldn't support a 'term' limit for USSC judges but possibly a retirement age, a time limit to ensure they move along. Anyway, I would be willing to discuss it.

    As far as Congress/Senate members....Senator Feinstein is now 90 years old, and refuses to retire giving up power. She recently announced she would not seek reelection in 2024 but step down even when seriously ill? Never. Nancy Pelosi is now 83 years old and intends to run for reelection again, Maxine Waters is 84...on and on...let's not even talk about Joey Biden. However, it is not only Democrats that refuse to give up power and remain long after they should have left. Republican Hal Rogers is 85, John Carter is 81... I guess what bothers me the most is Congress saw fit to mandate a maximum time for the Presidency, but they do not see the need or even the desire to limit their own time in the swamp and we see what that gets us - corruption at the highest level of government.
     
    SB21, 3M-TA3 and Ura-Ki like this.
  8. SB21

    SB21 Monkey+++

    Yep ,, the problem is ,, the ones that need term limits,, are the ones that have to vote for them . Anyone see the problem there ?? How the hell did that become law ?? I think I know,, but I'll wait for answers, just to see if I'm wrong .

    Heard that while Feinstein was out with her sickness,, that Piglosi was making all of her decisions for her while she was out. I saw a video of Feinstein when she came back after her absence,, a reporter asked where she had been ,, and she said she was there the whole time ,,, voting . Dementia ,,,, it seems to be running rampant in the democrat party these days .
     
    Ura-Ki likes this.
  9. Ura-Ki

    Ura-Ki Grampa Monkey

    Term limits should be imposed on all elected officials at all levels! Appointments should age out like they do in the military, set the age limit at 75, and force them out, or carry them out feet first! Idiots like Piglosi and Finetime need to be removed, if anything, by a no confidence censure, neither old gasbag is capable of thinking and breathing at the same time, let alone putting down the vodka long enough to have two thoughts in a row!
     
    SB21 likes this.
  10. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    No, I couldn't support a 75-year-old mandatory retirement, that's just too far down the road. Since, Social Security is 66 years old (or is it 67 now?), I would say a maximum age of 70. We must have sitting justices that are clear in mind with good stamina. It's definitely debatable but I think 75 is pushing it...maybe 72? Maybe...

    Here is a list of current ages of USSC. Sorry about formatting but no matter what I do the Monkey doesn't like so...:

    Justice Date of Birth Appointed by Sworn in
    Clarence Thomas 23 Jun 1948
    Age: 75 yr George W. Bush 23 Oct 1991

    Ketanji Jackson 14 Sep 1970
    Age: 52 yr Joe Biden 30 Jun 2022

    John G. Roberts 27 Jan 1955
    Age: 68 yr George W. Bush 29 Sep 2005

    Samuel A. Alito 1 Apr 1950
    Age: 73 yr George W. Bush 31 Jan 2006

    Sonia Sotomayor 25 Jun 1954
    Age: 69 yr Barack Obama 8 Aug 2009

    Elena Kagan 28 Apr 1960
    Age: 63 yr Barack Obama 7 Aug 2010

    Neil Gorsuch 29 Aug 1967
    Age: 55 yr Donald Trump 10 Apr 2017

    Brett Kavanaugh 12 Feb 1965
    Age: 58 yr Donald Trump 6 Oct 2018

    Amy Barrett 28 Jan 1972
    Age: 51 yr Donald Trump 27 Oct 2020
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2023
    Ura-Ki likes this.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7