** 09-Dec-2020 World View: Back to the Dred Scott decision
Cool Breeze wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:41 pm
> John, Do you think the inertia, bureaucracy, or status quo will
> prevent the SCOTUS from rightly taking or ruling on the Texas et
> al (states) Constitutional question? It is the cleanest it could
> possibly get and deserves to be heard, and sent to the House for a
> vote on the president, as this fraud was unconscionable. What's
> funny there is that at the very least, we could bury the
> Republican party once and for all if they betrayed Trump,
> again.
My opinion is pretty much the same as when I wrote about the Dred
Scott decision in September.
** 20-Sep-2020 World View: The Dred Scott Decision
**
viewtopic.php?p=54672#p54672
As I wrote at the time, the Dred Scott decision was a major, lasting
shock to the Supreme Court because many people believed that they
caused the Civil War with that decision. Thus, ever since then,
they see themselves as the guardians of the Union, and will make decisions
most likely to preserve the Union. In my opinion, that reasoning was
a major factor in the way they handled the Bush v Gore case in 2000.
So I expect the Supreme Court to be acting in whatever way they feel
will resolve the election issues in a way to resolve as many controversies
as possible, and to preserve the status of the Supreme Court as a
non-partisan institution. That's why the vote on the Pennsylvania
case on Tuesday was 9-0.
There's no doubt that there was massive fraud by the Democrats in the
last election, and it's the job of the Supreme Court to make sure it
doesn't happen again. It would also extremely disruptive to reverse
the election results. So I don't know where that leaves the Supreme
Court. I could imagine one possibility is that they would rule that
the results would be reversed in one or two states, but not enough to
reverse the election. I don't know if that would work, but I do think
that the court will try to find some similar kind of solution.