The Supreme Court will take over the last cases related to the elections, rejecting electoral impeachments presented by the president and his campaign in five states during the period: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
The decision was finalized within months of legal disputes. The court has not taken any action in these cases, and in another case has filed the petitions that are accelerating the process of the cases, with new indications that the magistrates are not interested in attending.
Some of the magistrates will express their decision in the case of not applying for cases before a decision of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania that will allow the vote to be taken by correcting that there have been three days after the elections, arguing necessary changes in the pandemic. Demo that Sufría the Postal Service to extend the period to receive votes by mail.
Republicans have applied to the Supreme Court to suspend this extension before elections. In October, after the death of the magistrate Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and antes that the judge Amy Coney Barrett will confirm for the case, the juveniles will vote 4-4 on the issue, maintaining the proverbial ten days to win voting votes .
In practice, these papers that are late are separate and have no side effects. The state informs that it receives less than 10,000 bullets during these three days. This is a small number of papelettes in altercation with the result of the presidential elections in the state, which Trump lost by 80,000 votes, which was precisely the argument of the magistrates to declare the case.
Trump will repatriate politically from the White House crackdown on immigration, abortion and the use of arms
The Pennsylvania officials argued that the case was irrelevant because of the results of the state elections and the certificate holder. Republicans argue that the juices should take the case to proportion orientation to future elections. Además de Thomas, otros dos jueces —Samuel Alito y Neil Gorsuch— concordaron con este ultimimo argumento.
Juez Clarence Thomas signaled that the cases were the “perfect opportunity” to address an important question about whether legislators or state courts have the ultimate word on the form in which federal elections take place.
“We can resolve this dispute before the elections, and, in the end, we will have clear rules. Now, the new brindamos clarifies for the future futures. The decision to deny the electoral occult power is a matter of doubt. “Do not do anything, we invite you to have a mayor confusion and erosion of the confidence of the voters”, wrote Thomas.
Trump hecho affirmations of a massive fraud in the generalized use of votes for correo due to the coronavirus pandemic, but the courts have not found that fundamentals are affirmations.
“A decision in these cases has no implication with respect to the 2020 elections,” wrote Alito. “Peru una decisión proportionaría una guía van onskatbare verdi para futuras elecciones”.
If you need four votes to accept a case for its revision. Although changing electoral rules debating the pandemic has been the subject of Republican challenges in the wake of Trump’s coup, the rest of the Conservatives’ council has been silent. Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett do not firmaron los desacuerdos de Thomas y Alito.
After the November 3 comics, the Supreme Court met meters away in cases flown by Trump’s campaign, while he was sued in another 60 cases presented in various states during which the Republican lost.
