[–] cabalstone 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Easy summary from the contents of the Reply...
I. Defendant States’ factual arguments lack merit.
A. Pennsylvania’s critiques of the evidence are false.
B. Georgia’s critiques of the evidence are false.
C. Michigan’s critiques of the evidence are false.
D. Wisconsin’s critiques of the evidence are false.
[–] Lawyer42 3 points -2 points 1 point (+1|-3) ago
The SCOTUS is going to deny this petition due to lack of Standing. Sometimes the law does not have a solution to every problem.
[–] Justice_Will_Prevail [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Even with respect to the Bush v. Gore decision?
[–] Lawyer42 3 points -3 points 0 points (+0|-3) ago
Yes. Gore v. Bush was a state law case (it was an appeal from the Florida State Supreme Court) that went up to the SC. It was not a case about one state suing another, i.e. Texas did not sue Florida. Standing was not the issue in Bush v. Gore. The issue was equal protection because there was no procedure in place to figure out hanging chads and because the court determined that there was insufficient time to grant relief even if a procedure could be figured out.
Ironically, the holding in Bush v. Gore actually helps Biden because the holding that there wasn't enough time to make changes creates precedent that the Court will the dates in federal law and are not going to alter them. Also, the Court made the decision to not invalidate Florida's election, but instead said that the count would stay as-is since it couldn't be fixed in time. That help's Biden's argument, not Trump.