Read on Twitter
Recent court rulings utterly debunk two nonsensical theories in MAGA land:
1) States violated their own law or the Federal Constitution.
2) The State Legislatures can choose electors directly.
1/
1) States violated their own law or the Federal Constitution.
2) The State Legislatures can choose electors directly.
1/
Wisconsin (Trump v. WEC) Part 1
“Wisconsin’s selection of it’s 2020 Presidential Electors was conducted in the very manner established by the Wisconsin Legislature."
"lost on the merits"
2/
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2020-12-12-Decision-And-Order-dckt-134_0.pdf
“Wisconsin’s selection of it’s 2020 Presidential Electors was conducted in the very manner established by the Wisconsin Legislature."
"lost on the merits"
2/
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/2020-12-12-Decision-And-Order-dckt-134_0.pdf
Wisconsin (Trump v. WEC) Part 2
"There has been no violation of the [Federal] Constitution"
Notice how this debunks the idea that Legislatures have to choose electors. Popular selection of Electors is the law (in all states), and it does NOT violate the Constitution.
3/
![Wisconsin (Trump v. WEC) Part 2"There has been no violation of the [Federal] Constitution"Notice how this debunks the idea that Legislatures have to choose electors. Popular selection of Electors is the law (in all states), and it does NOT violate the Constitution.3/](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqK-iXnXUAEZmcm.png "Wisconsin (Trump v. WEC) Part 2\"There has been no violation of the [Federal] Constitution\"Notice how this debunks the idea that Legislatures have to choose electors. Popular selection of Electors is the law (in all states), and it does NOT violate the Constitution.3/")
"There has been no violation of the [Federal] Constitution"
Notice how this debunks the idea that Legislatures have to choose electors. Popular selection of Electors is the law (in all states), and it does NOT violate the Constitution.
3/
Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1
"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review"
This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law.
4/
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf
![Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqLC1TAXYAQo8-M.png "Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1\"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review\"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf")
![Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqLC1ThW4AARogg.png "Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1\"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review\"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf")
![Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqLBqPpXAAAieMO.png "Michigan (King v Whitmer) Part 1\"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review\"This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law. 4/ https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf")
"Any alleged deviation from state election law amounts to a modification of state election law[DO NOT]open the door to federal review"
This goes to show that SCOTUS is not the authority on state law.
4/
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf
Pennsylvania Trump appeals (canvass of absentee and mail-in ballots) Part 1
"there is no evidence of fraud"
legal rationalizations should "aim at saving ballots, rather than voiding it"
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Opinion-Announcing-the-Judgment-of-the-Court1.pdf
"there is no evidence of fraud"
legal rationalizations should "aim at saving ballots, rather than voiding it"
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Opinion-Announcing-the-Judgment-of-the-Court1.pdf
Pennsylvania Trump appeals Part 2
THEY TRIED TO INVALIDATE A BALLOT BECAUSE THE COLOR OF THE PEN WAS WRONG!!!
This also goes to show the difference between mandatory and directive instructions from the legislature, more on this in a minute.
THEY TRIED TO INVALIDATE A BALLOT BECAUSE THE COLOR OF THE PEN WAS WRONG!!!
This also goes to show the difference between mandatory and directive instructions from the legislature, more on this in a minute.
Pennsylvania Trump appeals Part 3
Trump was trying to throw out thousands of ballots on technicalities that didn't "warrant the wholesale disenfranchisement of thousands of Pennsylvania voters"
Directives are not mandatory and don't validate the trashing of a legal vote.
Trump was trying to throw out thousands of ballots on technicalities that didn't "warrant the wholesale disenfranchisement of thousands of Pennsylvania voters"
Directives are not mandatory and don't validate the trashing of a legal vote.
