What if the new Supreme Court with the 6th conservative judge rules in mid-Nov mail-in ballots dont count and Trump wins the election because of that?

[JEDI]

What can the Dems or, heck, us Citizens do about it???

 

[vi edit]

We can stop with the bedwetting and just go vote. Then figure it out if we have to.

 

[Indus]

We can do nothing because we're a bunch of sissies.

If we were men we'd pack up these traitors and send them to Russia where they belong.. all 65 million of them but we don't have the balls!

 

[pete6032]

What can the Dems or, heck, us Citizens do about it???

Voting is a state issue. How could the supreme court nullify ballots?

 

[brycejones]

Jedi did you look into this at all before shitting your pants here?

 

[ivwshane]

According to the gun nutters, we can use our 2nd amendment rights to overthrow the government.

 

[Moonbeam]

According to the gun nutters, we can use our 2nd amendment rights to overthrow the government.

Won't be easy in California. I have to risk Covid just to buy ammo. Can't order it or guns through the mail. But then, 'What if they gave a Revolution and everybody was sequestering?"

 

[Aegeon]

That would be a straightforward version of an illegal coup with clearly not legitimate intervention by the Supreme Court to try to legitimatize it, and the public etc. should respond accordingly...

 

[Moonbeam]

Forgot my comment to the OP:

From an early age my Dad used to say to me from as young as I can remember and when when I had an 'if' question for him: "If a frog didn't have any hind legs would he bump his butt off. My first Koan, I think. Another, he would ejaculate at random moments: "Do you think it is as cold here as it is in the summer time?" Around age 4 I used to look in the bathroom mirror, grab my my throat at the atoms apple, shack up and down and saying 'Willy'. Gotta love vibrato.

So good luck trying to drive me crazy.

 

[dank69]

That's why they invented guillotines.

 

[JEDI]

Voting is a state issue. How could the supreme court nullify ballots?

tell that to Al Gore when the Supreme Court gift wrapped the presidency to Bush Jr by overriding the FL State courts

 

[HomerJS]

Forgot my comment to the OP:

From an early age my Dad used to say to me from as young as I can remember and when when I had an 'if' question for him: "If a frog didn't have any hind legs would he bump his butt off. My first Koan, I think. Another, he would ejaculate at random moments: "Do you think it is as cold here as it is in the summer time?" Around age 4 I used to look in the bathroom mirror, grab my my throat at the atoms apple, shack up and down and saying 'Willy'. Gotta love vibrato.

So good luck trying to drive me crazy.

Hate to tell you Moonbean the days of "___________ would never happen in a civilized society" are over. They may come back but not for a long time

 

[HomerJS]

Voting is a state issue. How could the supreme court nullify ballots?

Read the details of Bush v Gore. Supreme Court stopped a legal recount of the votes in Florida thereby handing the election to GW Bush.

Later forensics of the vote in Florida discovered Al Gore really won Florida and the Presidency.

 

[HomerJS]

What can the Dems or, heck, us Citizens do about it???

Take to the streets and turn Trump into Mussolini

 

[Viper1j]

What can the Dems or, heck, us Citizens do about it???

She might be cult, but she's not THAT crazy..

And even if she is, she wouldn't overplay her hand, by risking a 8 to 1 judgment against her.

The majority of members on the Supreme Court, were Americans before they became justices.

I trust them to do the right thing.

 

[Starbuck1975]

What can the Dems or, heck, us Citizens do about it???

He could very well win under that scenario, and there are also scenarios where Trump could legally challenge ballots that don’t meet lawful criteria for when they’re postmarked, chain of custody, delivered, etc. Absentee ballots are routinely discarded for similar reasons.

 

[Zorba]

She might be cult, but she's not THAT crazy..

And even if she is, she wouldn't overplay her hand, by risking a 8 to 1 judgment against her.

The majority of members on the Supreme Court, were Americans before they became justices.

I trust them to do the right thing.

It'd be 6-3. Thomas and Alito were never Americans first.

 

[interchange]

The courts could not wholesale discount all absentee ballots. As @Starbuck1975 says, they could only under the law affect a particular subset. Otherwise, such a ruling would be a straight up coup. It's a fantasy I'm not sure is worth entertaining.

 

[HomerJS]

The courts could not wholesale discount all absentee ballots. As @Starbuck1975 says, they could only under the law affect a particular subset. Otherwise, such a ruling would be a straight up coup. It's a fantasy I'm not sure is worth entertaining.

What makes you think they couldn't? They stopped a legal recount in Florida

 

[sandorski]

General Strike. Just refuse to Work and within days the powers that be will change their minds.

 

[Starbuck1975]

What makes you think they couldn't? They stopped a legal recount in Florida

No, they stopped an inconsistent recount that lacked judicial oversight.

 

[HomerJS]

No, they stopped an inconsistent recount that lacked judicial oversight.

Florida SC isn't judicial oversight? What was so inconsistent about it?

Also who ultimately received the most votes in Florida

 

[interchange]

What makes you think they couldn't? They stopped a legal recount in Florida

In the sense that they could render any decision they want, they could. But it would only ever be a complete farce.

Regarding the SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore, here is what the majority said:
1. there was equal protection violations because different counties were using different methods for counting votes
2. Florida intended to use the "safe harbor" protection by completing its recount before the Dec. 12th deadline, and a recount ordered by SCOTUS that complied with equal protection could not be completed by that deadline
3. the case was remanded back to FL Supreme Court to determine if Dec. 12th was indeed the final date for their electors to lock in under FL law

SCOTUS stopped a recount because they determined it was illegal. SCOTUS did not prohibit a legal recount from occurring. They just didn't order one. If they had, then it would mean that electors would not be selected in time for Congress to be required by law to accept their votes. They remanded the decision of whether the Dec 12th deadline was final under FL law. Gore chose not to fight in FL Supreme Court for a new recount. SCOTUS never prohibited it, and the FL Supreme Court decided to keep it as the deadline.

 

[interchange]

In actuality, Bush v. Gore is a more likely model of what is to happen. SCOTUS will not throw out mail in votes. If the results in any state meet any sort of legal grounds for challenge, SCOTUS will possibly determine that the voting violated equal protection, and they will be stuck with no way to order any sort of recount or redo which would meet equal protection and due process standards. They will require the states to figure out how they are going to certify electors, and they won't be able to do so in a way that satisfies the law, so Congress will have to intervene and decide what to do. That is a very scary scenario. But it is not SCOTUS discarding an enormous swath of votes.

 

[fskimospy]

In the sense that they could render any decision they want, they could. But it would only ever be a complete farce.

Regarding the SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore, here is what the majority said:
1. there was equal protection violations because different counties were using different methods for counting votes
2. Florida intended to use the "safe harbor" protection by completing it's recount before the Dec. 12th deadline, and a recount ordered by SCOTUS that complied with equal protection could not be completed by that deadline
3. the case was remanded back to FL Supreme Court to determine if Dec. 12th was indeed the final date for their electors to lock in under FL law

SCOTUS stopped a recount because they determined it was illegal. SCOTUS did not prohibit a legal recount from occurring. They just didn't order one. If they had, then it would mean that electors would not be selected in time for Congress to be required by law to accept their votes. They remanded the decision of whether the Dec 12th deadline was final under FL law. Gore chose not to fight in FL Supreme Court for a new recount. SCOTUS never prohibited it, and the FL Supreme Court decided to keep it as the deadline.

We should be clear that by stating that no constitutionally acceptable recount could take place by the deadline that they in effect prohibited one. Also of note, the majority's logic was so shaky that they explicitly stated their decision should not be used as precedent, something to the best of my knowledge has never been done in any case before or since.

I sometimes think back on that decision as it's probably the most consequential one of my lifetime. It's amazing how much death and misery might have been prevented had Al Gore won that election.