Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
126 House Reps
(nearly 2/3 of their caucus) were okay with destroying democracy, so that's nice.
Jeff Van Drew signed on too.
Edited by ScubaWolf on Dec 11th 2020 at 7:02:00 AM
"In a move surprising absolutely no one"It's really not, they argued that the Court had a duty to hear these cases regardless of the merits. Note they also said they opposed granting the relief that Texas was seeking, namely the whole "delay the EC votes" part, meaning that their stance is "we think the case should have been heard because we believe all State v State cases should get a hearing, but we don't think the court should give Texas what they wanted." This is fairly in tune with their existing stances.
Umm Texas GOP released a statement saying “Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”
. Like what the hell...
![]()
![]()
Actually, no; in Original Jurisdiction cases the court has to hear it.
I believe that the case in question was heard, for a given value of "heard." In short, it was dismissed for transparently obvious lack of standing and wasting the Court's time. The Court came this close to calling it a Frivolous Lawsuit.
I recall something about secession petitions and what have you when Obama was re-elected, though I don't know how much traction they got compared to this. 'Specially since a lot of them are contesting the election and what have you.
GOP officials talking about secession does raise some eyebrows for me, though. I suppose it's probably nothing, though.
Edited by Protagonist506 on Dec 11th 2020 at 5:44:28 AM
Leviticus 19:34

Also concerning is the fact that Alito and Thomas wanted to take the case.