When the Supreme Court of Chief Justice John Roberts rejected the lawsuit of the state of Texas and other states that said the election rules in contested battleground states like Pennsylvania were unconstitutionally written, SCOTUS ruled that it could not prove Texas or its citizens suffered harm by the processes by which another state selects electors and writes election rules.
This of course is nonsense. Supreme Court Justices are like field goal kickers. They have one job. In the case of SCOTUS, it is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. We are a union of states, operating by the consent of the governed, and any state is harmed when another state is allowed to willy-nilly ignore its own state constitution and the Constitution of the United States in favor of the whims and agendas of activist governors and activist state courts.
What the U.S. Constitution actually says is the state legislatures determine things. The Electors Clause — Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution — provides that “[e]ach state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.”
read more:
Replies
John Roberts is too concerned with being liked on the cocktail circuit in D.C. If he had any ethics, if he ever called about the rule of law or the constitutions, those feelings are long gone.
Those states broke the law CJ Robert's! Is it really because you despise POTUS?