October 12, 2025
"Long-Covid"-Mail-in-Voting-goes-to-SCOTUS
Timothy-Birdnow
What-part-of-"election-day"-is-tripping-them-up?
What to Expect From Supreme Court Case on Ballots That Come in After Elections
The-Constitutionn-specifies-one-specific-day-that-is-the-cutoff-for-voting.*If-Illinnois-wants-to-do-this-with-non-national-elections-they-might-have-a-case.But-they-can't-just-let-people-vote-and-vote-until-they-get-the-results-they-want.
Remember-the-election-of-2000;SCOTUS-cut-off-counting-of-ballots-after-it-became-obvious-the-Democrats-were-just-manufacturing-votes,not-counting-them.
FTA:
This-is-why-mmail-in-voting-should-be-illegal-in-the-first-place.
TThe-article-continues:
Essentially-she-is-arguing-for-the-cementing-of-the-powerful-in-place.Imagine-if-a-gambler-in-Vegas-found-the-roulette-wheel-was-rigged.Everyone-knows-the-House-always-wins-in-the-end-so-why-should-the-courts-grant-standing-to-the-gambler-if-he-is-cheated?That-is-essentially-what-she-is-arguing-in-favor-of.
What-part-of-"election-day"-is-tripping-them-up?
What to Expect From Supreme Court Case on Ballots That Come in After Elections
The-Constitutionn-specifies-one-specific-day-that-is-the-cutoff-for-voting.*If-Illinnois-wants-to-do-this-with-non-national-elections-they-might-have-a-case.But-they-can't-just-let-people-vote-and-vote-until-they-get-the-results-they-want.
Remember-the-election-of-2000;SCOTUS-cut-off-counting-of-ballots-after-it-became-obvious-the-Democrats-were-just-manufacturing-votes,not-counting-them.
FTA:
The plaintiffs, Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., and two presidential electors from the state, contend that federal law established Election Day and Illinois allows votes to come in two weeks longer than federal law allows, which would make such ballots effectively unlawful. Thus, unlawful ballots could cost Bost the election—or reduce his margin for victory.
The plaintiffs also argued the Bost campaign is further injured because it has to pay staff for an additional two weeks after the election.
Plaintiffs are represented by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.
Federal law 2 U.S. Code Section 7 states Election Day for federal offices is the Tuesday after the first Monday of November in even-numbered years.
Illinois says mail-in ballots must be postmarked by Election Day but can arrive up to two weeks later.
The plaintiffs also argued the Bost campaign is further injured because it has to pay staff for an additional two weeks after the election.
Plaintiffs are represented by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.
Federal law 2 U.S. Code Section 7 states Election Day for federal offices is the Tuesday after the first Monday of November in even-numbered years.
Illinois says mail-in ballots must be postmarked by Election Day but can arrive up to two weeks later.
This-is-why-mmail-in-voting-should-be-illegal-in-the-first-place.
TThe-article-continues:
The state of Illinois argued Wednesday that Bost, first elected in 2014, lacks standing in part because there is little chance he could lose a reelection contest.
Ascension Peptides
"There are some districts where the Republican registered parties are 98%; Democrats, too,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in her question to the plaintiffs. "Your rule [allowing any candidate to have standing on election law] would say that the candidate who has not just an insubstantial, but a statistically almost impossible chance of winning or losing—that that candidate can come in and seek a change of that rule. Correct?”
Paul Clement, representing Bost and the electors, said any candidate should have standing in an election law case.
"As to the 2% voter, I’m going to stand with the 2% candidate. I stand in lockstep with the Socialist Workers Party, and however many percentage votes John Anderson got,” Clement said, referring to 1980 independent presidential candidate John Anderson.
Sotomayor replied, "Those are strange bedfellows you’re taking.”
Well,I-wouldn't-want-to-share-a-bed-with-old-Sonja-but-that's-just-me.Ascension Peptides
"There are some districts where the Republican registered parties are 98%; Democrats, too,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted in her question to the plaintiffs. "Your rule [allowing any candidate to have standing on election law] would say that the candidate who has not just an insubstantial, but a statistically almost impossible chance of winning or losing—that that candidate can come in and seek a change of that rule. Correct?”
Paul Clement, representing Bost and the electors, said any candidate should have standing in an election law case.
"As to the 2% voter, I’m going to stand with the 2% candidate. I stand in lockstep with the Socialist Workers Party, and however many percentage votes John Anderson got,” Clement said, referring to 1980 independent presidential candidate John Anderson.
Sotomayor replied, "Those are strange bedfellows you’re taking.”
Essentially-she-is-arguing-for-the-cementing-of-the-powerful-in-place.Imagine-if-a-gambler-in-Vegas-found-the-roulette-wheel-was-rigged.Everyone-knows-the-House-always-wins-in-the-end-so-why-should-the-courts-grant-standing-to-the-gambler-if-he-is-cheated?That-is-essentially-what-she-is-arguing-in-favor-of.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:12 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 3 kb.
24kb generated in CPU 0.1258, elapsed 0.3352 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.3245 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.3245 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
