- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I still don’t get the “No standing” ruling
Posted on 6/30/22 at 12:44 pm to dewster
Posted on 6/30/22 at 12:44 pm to dewster
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?
The law isn't the question, ultimately. It's the state's refusal to play by their own rules that is at issue.
California says no ID. Fine, their assembly passes law, gov hair gel signs it. Great. But they don't have standing to sue Alabama for requiring ID, and enforcing it. Now, if Alabama passes a law that says only people wearing green on election day are allowed to vote, and California has suspicion (or proof) that redshirts were voting on election day, then California absolutely could and should sue Alabama for not enforcing its own laws.
The states enter into this federal union together with a reasonable understanding of what each state's rules are, in no small part because those rules are open and public record. When those get ignored, and directly impact other states (as in selecting the executive), then the only recourse (per Constitution)is to bring that case to the Supreme Court.
1
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:30 pm to goofball
quote:In a state election that would be apropos. In a national election, it's bullshite.
You in Louisiana have no standing to file a lawsuit against another state for them not enforcing their own election law.
The VRA, Senatorial election rather than Governor appointment, free-fair-and-unrigged elections etc., are requisite fixtures of the national electoral landscape. Meaning the impact in one impacts others. A rigged result in states electing a candidate poorly suited for other states in turn directly affects all states.
SCOTUS refusal to hear election cases in which states clearly violated their own Constitutions was despicable. More so as they've now elected to hear just such a case this Fall.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:36 pm to dewster
Sorry for the unintentional downvote. You’re correct.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:38 pm to TulaneFan
How about cite a specific case?
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:46 pm to TulaneFan
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:52 pm to RoyalAir
quote:
It's the state's refusal to play by their own rules that is at issue.
That’s the thing though, it’s their rules.
It’s not Texas or the SCOTUS job to interpret Penn State Law.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 1:54 pm to TulaneFan
I am a practicing attorney and I will spend the rest of my life trying to make it make sense.
scotus’s refusal to hear Texas v Penn was the biggest dereliction of a constitutional duty ever. There was no other legal forum. The actions of the Democrat party in swing states undermined federalism, the electoral process and the foundation of the USG.
There is no other jurisdiction available to decide a dispute btwn the states. The last time there was a dispute btwn the states with no forum to resolve - we resolved it by decimating our own population.
If there is no court to turn to - it’s Hatfields and McCoys.
I think Chicken shite Roberta got ACB and Kav to punt by promising they could get rid of Roe. And then that chicken shite tried to water it down anyway.
January 6 rioters who were not planted by the federal government are the result of being denied a forum for the redress of grievances. I blame Roberta for everything that followed.
scotus’s refusal to hear Texas v Penn was the biggest dereliction of a constitutional duty ever. There was no other legal forum. The actions of the Democrat party in swing states undermined federalism, the electoral process and the foundation of the USG.
There is no other jurisdiction available to decide a dispute btwn the states. The last time there was a dispute btwn the states with no forum to resolve - we resolved it by decimating our own population.
If there is no court to turn to - it’s Hatfields and McCoys.
I think Chicken shite Roberta got ACB and Kav to punt by promising they could get rid of Roe. And then that chicken shite tried to water it down anyway.
January 6 rioters who were not planted by the federal government are the result of being denied a forum for the redress of grievances. I blame Roberta for everything that followed.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:05 pm to Wednesday
The actions of one state resulted in consequences that affected another state, that’s my simplistic view.
And since the affected state had no standings it seems with that precedent, that any state(s) should have no standing if another state wants to succeed from the U.S.
Probably a big leap but it seems to be the same logic for me.
And since the affected state had no standings it seems with that precedent, that any state(s) should have no standing if another state wants to succeed from the U.S.
Probably a big leap but it seems to be the same logic for me.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:13 pm to TulaneFan
quote:
So if other states want to cheat a federal election I can pretty much just get fricked?
That's why this national popular vote campaign is such a terrible idea. Your state just awards it's electoral votes to the popular winner. So yeah, if CA and NY just count illegal and fake votes it's not just a CA/NY problem. Idiots.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:20 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
It’s not Texas or the SCOTUS job to interpret Penn State Law.
It is literally part of SCOTUS' job to regulate disputes between states. It's in the document that they're supposed to uphold.
Yes, SCOTUS has a vested interest, and authority, to require Penn to uphold Penn's own laws.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:24 pm to AggieHank86
So how are states going to stop this nonsense in the future?
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:34 pm to xxTIMMYxx
quote:Neighboring states don't. The residents of any given state MUST be responsible for their OWN elections.
So how are states going to stop this nonsense in the future?
Texas has NO BUSINESS interfering in Missouri's elections, and Louisiana has not business interfering in Pennsylvania's elections.
If the residents of Illinois are content with elections that are "less secure" than the residents of Oklahoma might think appropriate, that is THEIR business, and not that of the Okies.
Federalism. Sometimes it cuts in your favor and sometimes not.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:37 pm to RoyalAir
quote:
It is literally part of SCOTUS' job to regulate disputes between states. It's in the document that they're supposed to uphold.
This isn’t a dispute it Texas trying to Penn how their Laws work.
quote:
Yes, SCOTUS has a vested interest, and authority, to require Penn to uphold Penn's own laws.
You have to find some constitutional ground and “dispute between states” isn’t it.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:47 pm to SammyTiger
quote:Tell that to the VRA.
It’s not Texas or the SCOTUS job to interpret Penn State Law.
Meanwhile, Moore v. Harper could speak to the issue this Fall.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:48 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
You have to find some constitutional ground and “dispute between states” isn’t it.
What, pray tell, should you have Texas do when Pennsylvania acts in bad faith, and it directly impacts Texas?
Just say, "thems the breaks," even when Art 3 Sec 2 specifically says the SCOTUS is to mediate these disputes?Biden's energy policy, who is a direct result of Pennsylvania's failure to comply *with its own laws* abso-fricking-lutely impacts Texas.
I see that you disagree, which is fine. I'm just asking for what you think the remedy is.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:49 pm to SammyTiger
quote:No it is TX being negatively impacted by PA's unconstitutional corruption.
This isn’t a dispute it Texas trying to Penn how their Laws work.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:53 pm to AggieHank86
I’m not worried about other states interfering. I want to know what can be done in states where things are rigged. Oh, and stfu
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:This was not Missouri's election. This was a US election.
Texas has NO BUSINESS interfering in Missouri's elections
Posted on 6/30/22 at 2:59 pm to xxTIMMYxx
quote:
I want to know what can be done in states where things are rigged. Oh, and stfu
Citizens of that state can take action. Via litigation, elections, etc. But other states cannot.
Posted on 6/30/22 at 3:01 pm to Indefatigable
quote:They did. The courts refused those cases on standing as well.
Citizens of that state can take action.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News