Thursday, December 17, 2020

Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Texas v. Pennsylvania, Claims Lack of Standing


On 11 December, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear the case Texas v. Pennsylvania. The court cited "lack of standing" as the reason. The vote has been reported to be 7-2 with Justice Thomas and Justice Alito dissenting. From the Supreme Court Website:

The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot. Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

It is a devastating decision for President Trump and the Republic.  There are other routes through the Supreme Court to reverse the tainted elections in swing states, but this decision shows how reluctant the Court is to hear an election case.

There are other remedies. The electoral college was designed to prevent exactly such a situation, where a recognizable corrupt individual was somehow elected by the popular vote. 

The Constitution has been so battered by the assault of the Progressives over the last century, few checks and balances have much strength any more. 

Barring unforeseen miracles or accidents, such as Joe Biden tripping over a dog and cracking his skull instead of his foot, a Biden/Harris or Harris/Biden presidency grows closer. 

With the election behind us, the Left/Media/Tech Oligarchs/Deep state are covering the Biden corruption story like it just appeared, out of nowhere.

If they had covered the story when it was orginally released, it is almost certain Joe Biden would never have been elected. President Trump's victory would have been exceedingly hard to overcome, even with massive cheating.

The fallout of the Supreme Court not having the courage to do their duty will be large. It is bound to depress voters, at least for a few days, in the critical senatorial runoff elections in Georgia. 

A never give up attitude is needed, now more than ever.  They Senate stands as a significant barrier to the United States going all out Venezuela. 

Today, the Sean Hannity radio show version on Facebook was throttled bad to 19 views from 200,000 for putting out "misleading" information about the election and vote fraud, according to the radio show.

There are still many battles to be fought. This is a setback, but the mask is off. We lost a battle, not the war.

Most of the Left's power is in its ability to control the information flow. 

One of the best things a patriot can do, is support platforms which do not censor their political content.  Second "Amendment supporters need to continue doing what we have been doing for the last 50 years. Building networks, educating friends and relatives, and continuing to fight. 

Maybe the "originalists" on the court will feel compelled to protect the Second Amendment. There are other cases in the pipeline.

Buck up freedom lovers. Protecting freedom can be hard. It is far preferable to the alternatives.

 Pray for our country and for a restoration of justice and truth.

 ©2020 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch




Anonymous said...

Alito Is correct. Article three states when their is a constitutional question between two or more states the USSC has original jurisdiction and must settle the issue. this is another instance of how messed up the courts are in this country..

Anonymous said...

If the information about Roberts is true, it is a very dangerous precedent and signals to radical groups that you can riot and burn cities to get what you want from the supreme court.

Anonymous said...

If any one cares to pay attention to the constitution. We have three branches of government Executive, legislative and Judicial. To change the constitution requires a constitutional amendment. state or Federal constitution can only be changed by a ratified amendment by the legal voters. No congress or legislator can pass a law or an act to amend the constitution. The Pennsylvania legislature passed an unconstitutional law to change the voting process . That is the issue Texas challenged that change because it would set an unconstitutional precedent that other states might follow. An attempt to corrupt the election. Because o9ne state challenges another state on constitutional grounds the USSC must hear the complaint. Each state has standing simply because they are a state demanding compliance with the constitution. a democratic controlled legislature attempted to amend the state constitution and got caught. 19 other states joined Texas demanding a ruling. A fact of existing law, No law can be construed to say any thing not actually written. This is the basic argument to defend the second amendment. the second amendment only has 26 words in it. It has been construed to say many things not physically written. How many words have been added to the second amendment that are not physically written in those 26 words? What the supreme court fears is ruling against Pennsylvania would nullify all of the U.S. Congress laws and acts that violate the 26 words of the second amendment. The court would set precedent all of the unconstitutional laws and acts passed by congress would be null and void. Webster's dictionary definition of Arms would prove the laws and acts construe words to exist that have not been or are not written in the second amendment. Thing about it!!!!