When the equality lawsuits reach the supreme court and what will be a constitutional crisis

The biggest obstacle to a Biden presidency is by far the equal protections act found in the 14th amendment. No matter whose fault it is, states that did not adhere to standards consistently across their entire state and allowed different methods and policies on correcting mail in ballots, poll watchers, day of voting methods, registering voters, tech funding, and the plethora equality issues at the polls that I did not mention. Precedence can be found on numerous occasions such as the Florida recount being thrown out.

In the

en.wikipedia.org...

the supreme court ruling it was found by a bipartisan 7-2 majority that counties must have a consistent recount procedure. How they choose to resolve the issue is a huge question mark. If nothing is done about the inequalities then that will set the toxic precedence that counties will compete for tech funding and inconsistent laws for each county will spiral out of control and whichever has the most funding from corporate giants and creative ways to get votes in will rule the day.

Due to population's in the cities the corporations will vigorously fund the counties with the most potential return on votes. The failure here is not that anyone cheated that's a different argument but due to the covid 19 scare state's left gaping holes in processes to adhere to. In all actuality, if it were pursued over half of the states did not adhere to this founding principle and would lose their electoral votes. Ultimately this election decision will fall on congress.

Other arguments while statistically have merit are hard to be proven without evidence. I suspect the machine anomalies will be a circle of investigation for years to come.

a reply to: tinktinktink

While I am not sure it will make a difference, pretty sure they will just say oh well not going to go against the reported vote.

But what you wrote was almost the same thought I had when they started this mail in push, not the USPS but the states actually having rules in place to handle the extra mail in ballots etc, then the fact they only had a few months to figure it out and most states seemed to have gone Meh.. just let the chips fall.

Majority of the states never touched absentee ballots unless it was a close vote, certainly never expected what a third of the state to mail in ballots.

If it reaches the supreme court seeing how they rule will be interesting.

I think that the USA should standardize election laws for Federal elections all over the country. If Federal money is used by the candidate, then it should follow these rules. Local elections, not so much of a Federal issue, but in the case of state Senators sent to Washington, equal rules should apply everywhere. Id required to vote everywhere and if they are going to use mail in ballots, people need to go register for them in person prior to being accepted to vote, bringing ID at that time and providing a signature for comparison purposes.

a reply to: Irishhaf

Doubtful they would let it pass as there are more constitutionalist on the court and to not face it now will alienate half of America and if its not addressed now then it will only get worse in coming elections as that would signal a green light to ignore the 14th. I think they what they decide now even if they refuse the case will be pivotal to future elections and should be considered a critical juncture.

originally posted by: rickymouse
I think that the USA should standardize election laws for Federal elections all over the country. If Federal money is used by the candidate, then it should follow these rules. Local elections, not so much of a Federal issue, but in the case of state Senators sent to Washington, equal rules should apply everywhere. Id required to vote everywhere and if they are going to use mail in ballots, people need to go register for them in person prior to being accepted to vote, bringing ID at that time and providing a signature for comparison purposes.

You might need to take that up with Constitutionalists.

I believe it would require an amendment.

Really as it stands the only just decision that could be made beyond letting congress choose the next president would be to have a do over when the polls are able to be implemented with equal process and Covid-19 isn't an extenuating factor.

a reply to: tinktinktink

What equality lawsuits?

a reply to: Annee

Agreed (h@ll has frozen over) Federal law itself cannot encroach upon states rights beyond enforcing the bill of rights if I am not mistaken.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: tinktinktink

What equality lawsuits?

ballotpedia.org...(COVID-19)_pandemic,_2020#Relevant_litigation
about halfway down their is a list of relevant lawsuits pending by a wide berth of folks. From the looks of things folks from the right and left are alledgin inequalities in the 2020 election process. I would say atleast 40 states (too lazy to count) involved and hundreds of lawsuits.

For ones directly opened by Trump campaign look at this page still a few. More to come next week from what I understand

ballotpedia.org...

originally posted by: tinktinktink
a reply to: Annee

Agreed (h@ll has frozen over) Federal law itself cannot encroach upon states rights beyond enforcing the bill of rights if I am not mistaken.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: rickymouse
I think that the USA should standardize election laws for Federal elections all over the country. If Federal money is used by the candidate, then it should follow these rules. Local elections, not so much of a Federal issue, but in the case of state Senators sent to Washington, equal rules should apply everywhere. Id required to vote everywhere and if they are going to use mail in ballots, people need to go register for them in person prior to being accepted to vote, bringing ID at that time and providing a signature for comparison purposes.

You might need to take that up with Constitutionalists.

I believe it would require an amendment.

Yes it would probably need an amendment, but it would give all states equal rules to follow in an election and that would make it harder for cheaters. A large city area could dominate the state if there were lots of illegal votes being collected there, ID is required here to vote, and they have made some adjustments this year to voting but the voting people follow the state rules pretty well in the smaller communities.

Last of all I have to say, I used to be liberal, and hung around with Liberals a lot. The mindset of Liberals is generally, we do not have to follow the laws precisely because we plan on changing them sooner or later. You seem to be liberal, you have to know what I am saying is generally true. They work to make the laws on the books they do not like seem illegitimate but when they get them altered, they find out there was other reasons the laws were formed, to fend off paths of corruption before they start. I have seen this many times happen throughout the years, rules tossed aside turn into nightmares because it creates multiple paths of change, some leading to all kinds of bad things.

I realized this about ten years ago, it is not rare, it is happening a lot now that many communities have lessened local city and township regulations governing their society. Most of these changes were petitioned for by liberals. Conservatives dislike change, liberals want to change things. This is immaterial in relation to Democrat and Republicans, the far right is usually liberal, wanting change to the right, same as the far left is liberal but wanting change in the other direction.

a reply to: tinktinktink

I see nothing election related.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The second link pertains to trumps specific lawsuits
Or google works wonders if you would like your own sources.

got to google by going to the url box at the top of your browser and

just type in " Trumps 2020 election lawsuits"

you should receive millions of results for your browsing pleasure.

Now if this is too complicated for you go to this site to brush up on your browsing skills.

Also if your pretending to not understanding in an attempt to derail the thread that is against the T&C and its not in the ops responsibility to teach you to use your computer.

a reply to: rickymouse

I’m a social liberal. Equal rights, stay out of my womb, equal pay, more science, separation of church and state, etc.

But, personally lean toward organization and control — which I have to keep in check.

So, I’m not big on states rights on things that affect the whole country.

IMO — if it affects everyone equally, it should be Federal.

a reply to: tinktinktink

I looked on both links and see no 'equality' related election lawsuits. In the time it took you to make your smarmy post you could have linked one of these alleged suits.

As a federal judge said:

This is simply not how the Constitution works.

Trump is dead in the water here, he will drag this out as long as possible largely so he can keep panhandling donations from suckers who still think he has a chance.

Trump is putting his ego over the country. In two months he will be evicted from the White House. Until then we have an adult child who is prone to temper tantrums that has nuclear launch codes in his pocket.

Isn't that great?

originally posted by: jrod
As a federal judge said:

This is simply not how the Constitution works.

Trump is dead in the water here, he will drag this out as long as possible largely so he can keep panhandling donations from suckers who still think he has a chance.

Trump is putting his ego over the country. In two months he will be evicted from the White House. Until then we have an adult child who is prone to temper tantrums that has nuclear launch codes in his pocket.

Isn't that great?

It wont be over till the supreme court says so. Most state supreme courts in the states that are being sue'd are partisan hacks that would just assume use the constitution than toilet paper in the restroom. The legitimacy of a state supreme court is questionable at best and since Trump has been president have been overuled by the higher courts in every decision.

a reply to: tinktinktink

Blockchain voting will solve the voting problem easily.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: tinktinktink

Blockchain voting will solve the voting problem easily.

Just one opinion against.

In the wake of Utah making history with blockchain voting during the 2020 presidential election, some security experts have ramped up their criticism of the idea. Earlier this week, a team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology released a draft of a paper titled Going from Bad to Worse: From Internet Voting to Blockchain Voting. The paper follows the release of an MIT report in February that explored the vulnerabilities of the Voatz blockchain voting app. www.govtech.com...

a reply to: tinktinktink

Keep drinking that kool-aide!

More from a federal judge:

This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence..

The nature of a judges duties means he or she must be unbiased. The notion that these cases are being thrown out because of 'democrat judges' is ignorant and absurd.