WhatFinger

The ramifications of this troubling Supreme Court decision will reverberate for a long time--which the judicial interpretation requested by Ohio could have helped avoid

Supreme Court needs to explain why Texas and Ohio were shut out


Supreme Court needs to explain why Texas and Ohio were shut outThe US Supreme Court needs to explain why the doors of its hallowed portals were firmly slammed in Texas and Ohio's faces--without allowing them to at least first tell the Court why it should change its mind.  The Court's reasons for doing so were contained in this brief Order:
The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot. Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.
Read Full Article...

Welcome to CFP’s Comment Section!

The Comment section of online publications is the new front in the ongoing Cancel Culture Battle.

Big Tech and Big Media are gunning for the Conservative Voice—through their Comment Sections.

Canada Free Press wishes to stay in the fight, and we want our fans, followers, commenters there with us.

We ask only that commenters keep it civil, keep it clean.

Thank You for your patience and for staying aboard the CFP ‘Mother Ship’.

READ OUR Commenting Policy


CFP Comments

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments




Recommended by Canada Free Press


Subscribe

Sponsored