re: I still don’t get the “No standing” ruling

quote:

---

The actions of one state resulted in consequences that affected another state, that’s my simplistic view.

---

This is the correct view.

The Supreme Court is the EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction to resolve a dispute between two states. The injury wasn't to the citizens of the state, it was the actual compact between the states, AKA the Federal constitution that was breached.

How the hell is there no standing to enforce a breach of contract?

It was truly and utterly chicken shite.

Roberts was so scared of MUH insurrection, that he failed to do his duty and hid behind his black robe, which may as well be a dress.

If there had been an actual trial on the merits as intended by the Founders - BLM would have thrown a temper tantrum, but law and order would have been restored.

If the trial or whatever procedure they would have derived to determine whether these states followed the laws that the legislature drafted, then even if the laws were dumb, and Fat Stacy just pushed the envelope to fit over her fat arse, then I would be completely fine with it.

But they didn't. There's no closure. And a significant part of the country, knows that Joe Biden was sworn in and is as a legal matter the president, but he has zero credibility or authority. He's a useless shell of a man whose dishonesty is only exceeded by his idiocy.

I will remain furious until there are answers. And I hope at some point there is justice about it.

We now have a President* that half the country thinks is illigitimate, and the results have been catastrophic.

quote:

---

I can’t let this go and I still don’t understand why they were given a pass to trample all over the voting rights of millions of Americans

---

Nor should anyone.

It absolutely justifies a kinetic insurrection.

Which we didn’t get.

quote:

---

Neighboring states don't. The residents of any given state MUST be responsible for their OWN elections.

Texas has NO BUSINESS interfering in Missouri's elections, and Louisiana has not business interfering in Pennsylvania's elections.

---

This is 150 percent wrong.

I wish I could go back to all my posts on the Election Board.

The president is NOT elected by the popular vote. The president is elected by the electoral college. At some point in our history, the electoral college members were appointed by state legislatures, they met, and then hashed out who would be president. Nobody voted.

At some point, Andrew Jackson got royally fricked over so states (VOLUNTARILY) changed their own laws so that now, in all fifty states the electoral college members are elected by ppl voting for whatever president they want.

There are special rules that apply to the STATES themselves set forth in the constitution, and they don't say shite about individual voters acting.

The constitution specifically states that state LEGISLATURES decide the members of the elecotral college. Not state voters. The swing states were corrupted by Democrat members of their own governments - which in most cases had Democrat Secretaries of State, or other officials actually writing new rules and telling election officials that they had to follow these rules, as opposed to those passed by the actual state legislatures AS REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION TO WHICH ALL STATE GOVERNMENTS AGRREE TO BE BOUND.

The fricking state of Pennsylvania got sued for breach of contract. The contract requires Pennsylvania to follow its own law. Pennsylvania did not. Demonstrably. They followed a mail in voting rule that violated its own constitution, and then implemented all kinds of other shennagins at the behest of their woefully unattractive Secretary of State.

Georgia, and how I hate that smug bastard Kemp the most, acting first thru Kemp, and then thru Ratburger - entered into an unenforceable consent decree with Fat Stacy so that she could basically run a freaking organized crime ring junta acting paralell to the Rat and nobody would admit she outmaneuvered them, either because those two milquetoast uniparty criminals were in on it - of because they were too arrogant to admit they got rolled by a gap toothed porno writer.

You're wrong Hank. You're just wrong on this. There should have been a trial. And Roberts avoided it because he's a coward too terrified to have his own opinions.

quote:

---

But that's a two way street, right?. Let's say Washington or California decides that voter ID's are evil....should they have standing to sue states with voter ID laws?

---

no they dont.... but if a state has laws on the book and are not following should another state have to allow the fraud?

quote:

---

Violating their own laws affects me in Louisiana.

---

Yes, but the way I see it, only after the results of the violations are tallied and cost determined. From 11/6/21 to 1/20/21, there was no way of determining standing, ie what was lost to La. by the illegal actions at the state level of GA.,AZ, PA, MI, WI, et al.
Example:
If a State DOT upstream broke it's own environmental laws, to the blind eye of it's legislature and began dumping a hundred thousand gallons of motor oil into the Mississippi River every month, thus damaging the La. seafood industry to the tune of $100MM+, would the State of La. AG start filing suit? Sure
Same concept:
If a State can muster an economic team to determine the losses incurred by the taxpayers of said State that would have otherwise not have been incurred, had certain states abided by there own laws, is that not standing?
What is the penalty? A settlement split across the offending States?
The point is, if laws were broken at a State level, that effects $$ other States, without remedy, it will happen again and again and again.

quote:

---

Go read why and then remember how pumped y’all were for the Kracken and shitty lawyers:

---

Wrong cases, but thanks for the well-considered and intellectual response.

No standing = don't wanna fool with it now