2000 Mules

[floridays]

There were similar cases all over.

Similar but not the same set of facts.

Standing was never an issue in Pennsylvania, laches was the reason for the denial in Pennsylvania. The first refusal was based on lack of damages, no one had been damaged yet. This was by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the final refusal was attributed to laches, filing the complaint to late.

The Texas refusal was based on lack of standing.

 

[newfie]

Uh huh. And I was responding to your comment about Congress prohibiting drop boxes, which is a usurpation of the state legislatures power to establish voting rules.

right i guess i should have phrased it differently . i didnt understand his comment and meant to pose it as a question.

 

[newfie]

I said noting of the sort.
I said what you offered was unconstitutional.
It's all in text here. Don't put words in my mouth.
This is an arguement you need to back away from.
That was some really low trying to attribute this, floridas comment that it was against the constitution to not have ballot boxes, to me. I never said anything of the sort.

@zubenelgenubi, his post concerning my statement was a deception.

newfie, will you retract the statement or continue to decieve?

too much dialogue. i didnt understand what you said initially.

 

[floridays]

right i guess i should have phrased it differently . i didnt understand his comment and meant to pose it as a question.

To answer it as a question, yes states can make drop boxes illegal.

too much dialogue. i didnt understand what you said initially.

Ok. Individual state legislatures can outlaw drop boxes, the Federal government cannot.

 

[vantexan]

The Texas refusal was based on lack of standing.

That was the reason given but it came down to the majority didn't want to touch it and used that as an excuse. Thomas and Alito wanted to hear it so in their minds standing wasn't an issue. But it was an extremely sensitive political hot potato so the majority punted.

 

[floridays]

That was the reason given but it came down to the majority didn't want to touch it and used that as an excuse. Thomas and Alito wanted to hear it so in their minds standing wasn't an issue. But it was an extremely sensitive political hot potato so the majority punted.

Exactly, but the make-up of the Court has not changed and they do not want to affect elections.
No matter what their feelings may have been they are on record saying Texas had no standing to bring up other states election practices. That is the plain hard fact.

I agree with both Thomas and Alito but the fact is there would have to be another set of facts that resemble these and the only time they can present themselves would be under the same conditions, national election, after the votin.

Good luck with it.