Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio...
by jcranmer on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @04:32PM
(#25365430)
If you think this is the constitutional process for disputing an election, you're mistaken.
Trump is arguing that (a) SCOTUS should (b) order several states to have their legislatures appoint new electors (c) on the basis of a suit brought by Texas against several other states (d) alleging that state court rulings modifying electoral law (in accordance with state statutes) are unconstitutionally overruling state legislatures' ability to determine their electors. (See http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201...)
There are 4 separate elements in that assertion that are each unprecedented in terms of disputing an election. SCOTUS is not the venue for election disputes; state courts are. No one has ever before argued that state legislators can appoint electors in lieu of popular vote, and as some briefs have pointed out, several state statutes (including some of the states involved here!) expressly forbid that. No state has ever before tried to challenge the election procedures of another state. And the legal basis for doing all of this is itself without precedent.
Trump is arguing that (a) SCOTUS should (b) order several states to have their legislatures appoint new electors (c) on the basis of a suit brought by Texas against several other states (d) alleging that state court rulings modifying electoral law (in accordance with state statutes) are unconstitutionally overruling state legislatures' ability to determine their electors. (See http://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201...)
There are 4 separate elements in that assertion that are each unprecedented in terms of disputing an election. SCOTUS is not the venue for election disputes; state courts are. No one has ever before argued that state legislators can appoint electors in lieu of popular vote, and as some briefs have pointed out, several state statutes (including some of the states involved here!) expressly forbid that. No state has ever before tried to challenge the election procedures of another state. And the legal basis for doing all of this is itself without precedent.
This is not normal.