The Supreme Court: Two scenarios

[mystery-ak]

November 6, 2020
The Supreme Court: Two scenarios
By Peter Skurkiss

As of this writing, it's a good bet that the election mess will end up in the Supreme Court for resolution.  If so, one of two scenarios is likely to unfold.  One is the that the five conservative justices will have the backbone to stand firm for the rule of law.  These justices are Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch.  Chief Justice John Roberts, who is a proven equivocator, could vote either way, but he would not affect the final decision.

The other less desirable scenario is that at least one of the five conservative justices gets weak and surrenders to the pressure of the moment.  That pressure can be called "practicality."  Forming the practicality mindset would be the riots, looting, and violence that occurred this summer and are ongoing to some extent.  And indeed, many leftist groups are promising turmoil if Donald Trump wins a second term.  Plus the media will make it clear that they intend to mau-mau justices who deviate from the liberal script.

In such an environment, a weak justice might reason like this: "If I vote to uphold the election laws, the Biden forces will go on a rampage.  On the other hand, if the decision goes against Trump, his supporters will huff and puff, but despite media propaganda, I know they are not as violence-prone as their opposition.  So I'll be practical.  I'll twist my reading of the law to make it serve the cause of social peace."  And should one conservative justice weaken, Roberts will be sure to follow like a puppy looking for a petting.

more
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/the_supreme_court_two_scenarios.html

[catfish1957]

I more predict that 2-6 weeks from now SCOTUS will be analgous to a big city Traffic Court, and it won't boil down to one decison like in 2000.

Biggest mystery, will be how often ACB will recuse herself from voting.  One thing is for certain.  Cruz had proof that Robers has a hatred of Trump.  Take that for whatever it is worth.

[Cyber Liberty]

I more predict that 2-6 weeks from now SCOTUS will be analgous to a big city Traffic Court, and it won't boil down to one decison like in 2000.

Biggest mystery, will be how often ACB will recuse herself from voting.  One thing is for certain.  Cruz had proof that Robers has a hatred of Trump.  Take that for whatever it is worth.

If ACB shirks her duty, I'm done with her.  I've had it up to here (my index finger is pointing at my forehead) with shirkers like Sessions, Barr, Wray, right on down the justice line.  These people were appointed to drain the swamp, and all they have done is choke the pipes leading to the pumps.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I more predict that 2-6 weeks from now SCOTUS will be analgous to a big city Traffic Court, and it won't boil down to one decison like in 2000.

Biggest mystery, will be how often ACB will recuse herself from voting.  One thing is for certain.  Cruz had proof that Robers has a hatred of Trump.  Take that for whatever it is worth.

I don't think ACB will recuse herself.  I'm more concerned that this SC will, in a 6-3 vote, let lower court decisions stand.

[libertybele]

If ACB shirks her duty, I'm done with her.  I've had it up to here (my index finger is pointing at my forehead) with shirkers like Sessions, Barr, Wray, right on down the justice line.  These people were appointed to drain the swamp, and all they have done is choke the pipes leading to the pumps.

This is true all of them failed; but keep in mind it was Trump who appointed them.  That has always raised question in my mind -- but that issue is irrelevant now along with all the other questions I've had about him. I voted for him.  I was hopeful.

[libertybele]

I don't think ACB will recuse herself.  I'm more concerned that this SC will, in a 6-3 vote, let lower court decisions stand.

You being the optimist that you are (and I am in no way faulting you for that or criticizing you), if you are seeing this scenario, I will bet that you are probably right.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

November 6, 2020
The Supreme Court: Two scenarios
By Peter Skurkiss

As of this writing, it's a good bet that the election mess will end up in the Supreme Court for resolution.  If so, one of two scenarios is likely to unfold.  One is the that the five conservative justices will have the backbone to stand firm for the rule of law.  These justices are Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch.  Chief Justice John Roberts, who is a proven equivocator, could vote either way, but he would not affect the final decision.

The other less desirable scenario is that at least one of the five conservative justices gets weak and surrenders to the pressure of the moment.  That pressure can be called "practicality."  Forming the practicality mindset would be the riots, looting, and violence that occurred this summer and are ongoing to some extent.  And indeed, many leftist groups are promising turmoil if Donald Trump wins a second term.  Plus the media will make it clear that they intend to mau-mau justices who deviate from the liberal script.

In such an environment, a weak justice might reason like this: "If I vote to uphold the election laws, the Biden forces will go on a rampage.  On the other hand, if the decision goes against Trump, his supporters will huff and puff, but despite media propaganda, I know they are not as violence-prone as their opposition.  So I'll be practical.  I'll twist my reading of the law to make it serve the cause of social peace."  And should one conservative justice weaken, Roberts will be sure to follow like a puppy looking for a petting.

more
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/the_supreme_court_two_scenarios.html

Constitution allows for what happens in a scenario like this. State Legislatures choose the electors, electors choose the president. Period.

[Fishrrman]

Weird wrote:
"Constitution allows for what happens in a scenario like this. State Legislatures choose the electors, electors choose the president. Period."

You make a good point.
The clock is ticking, and time is of the essence.

But...  there's so much fraud in so many places, I predict it will be impossible to make a sufficient case [in the courts, including the Supreme Court] against "enough of it" to change the final result (which is Biden winning in the Electoral College).

Think of "the swarm" strategy (once promulgated by Iran) of sending hundreds of small attack boats against an American ship. You may swat down a good number of them, but there's still the chance that a few will "get through" to the objective.

I believe the timeline mandates that electors be certified by the states within 6 days of the convening of the Electoral College (which will be December 14 this year), which means by December 8. That's barely a month away, and the wheels of justice (as applied through the courts) turn slowly.

So what happens when December 7 arrives, and these cases are still bogged down in court?

The Supreme Court may just dismiss them. I can't see what other option they might pursue at that point. They may order existing vote totals "to stand" as they are.

As Weird says, by a few days prior to December 8, the only other course for state legislatures would be to choose the electors (as per the Constitution). Would they dare to do this?

Would the Republican legislature of, say, Pennsylvania assign its electors to Mr. Trump, on the argument that the local authorities had botched/cheated in the vote totals?

Who controls the legislatures of the states in contention?