Frivolous Lawsuit Headed to Supreme Court

Fantine said:

MSN

Is this true? Should not "Rejected" been rubber stamped on this ridiculous lawsuit before it hits the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court declined to consider the lawsuit on January 9, but the plaintiff, Raland Brunson, filed an appeal on January 23. Now, the court has to reconsider whether or not to hear the case, according to an update on the SCOTUS' website that read that the lawsuit was "distributed for conference" on Friday.
How much "reconsideration" should it take to decide that there is no possible reason that Biden should be removed and Trump reinstated? Has this not been investigated and studied and litigated and relitigated as the potential indictments and lawsuits and criminal charges pile up?

In addition, it gives the insurrectionists and most irrational of his supporters "hope" and keeps them in an agitated and potentially dangerous frame of mind.

Click to expand...

I am unaware of the Constitutional provision for the High Court to invalidate a Federal election absent clear and convincing evidence besides “he should have won!”

This lawsuit is insane. It wants Congress to be in trouble because they didn't investigate the election after 154 members of Congress (a minority), citing no evidence, claimed the election should be investigated. Since they didn't investigate, he wants the 387 members that voted to certify the election to be removed from Congress and barred from ever running for public office again. Last, he claims he should receive $2 Billion in damages tax free. How is anyone taking this suit seriously?

I mean, this is so bad that even the Trump lawyer, Jenna Ellis, that worked with Giuliani on the "election was stolen but not fraud" lawsuits says the Supreme Court was right to reject the lawsuit. As she correctly states, "The Supreme Court is not the arbiter of how a member does his or her job. This is a nonjusticiable issue. Imagine if a future Dem sought removal of members for 'failing to investigate' Trump. This would open the door to further weaponizing."

One more issue, on further reflection, his claim is completely invalid. His claim is, "that election fraud made his vote for Trump in 2020 invalid when he cast his ballot in Utah." The issue here is, in Utah a majority voted for Trump -- so his vote was used to help nominate the Trump slate of electors in the State of Utah. As such, his vote was not invalid as it counted and "elected" the persons (the Trump slate of Electoral voters) he voted for (since in the US we vote for the electors who will vote for the President, not for actual Presidential candidate). The entire basis of the lawsuit is false.

"A petition for reconsideration. Hang in their everyone," Brunson wrote on Facebook.

I hope he spells more better in his court filings.

Trump is not behind this - and his legal advisors support the Supreme Court's decision to reject the hearing. Thought this might need to be clearly stated.