HOME | message board | videos | photos |

Reading all 120 messages in thread
message board home

11/6/2020 11:36:23 AM

Reply or ReplyNewSubject
Section 4: President & Congress
Subject: Post-election predictions Msg# 1103538

From:

Tom Hemmick Forum Leader

Joined 7/21/2005

To:

Bob Cherry (Read)

Joined 2/9/2005

If you had just added the a word like "seems" instead of saying "clearly"

The former Fla. AG, Pam Bondi, has affirmed that "Federal law" requires all states to allow observers. Presumably this is federal legislation, and then there's' likely regulations and also case law/ precedents. I'm just presuming.

Kinda a lot of weeds to be sorted thru.... And needing the capability of a law library search tool, not just the internet, to check it out. Seems a mountain I'd rather not climb.

And then you'd add in reports, for example, that Justice Roberts is "reluctant to . . . ." Maybe call that "judicial temperament" or what ever.

Bottom line -- Very cloudy skies and muddy waters for you or me to be predicting what's going to be next.

For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where:
Your wording "what is clearly" needs some basis for how you arrived at that, before we could hope to be discussing any exceptions. needs some basis for how you arrived at that, before we could hope to be discussing any exceptions.

If the framers wanted the courts to have a roll in a State's Right to conduct its own elections, I should think a Constitutional blurb or two would speak to their wishes. Nothing in A2.1.2 can be construed as to give the Supremes a roll in the process unless there's a constitutional aspect involved with the issue. As far as I know, infractions are localized with some bellyaching about federal laws being broken. I believe laws are being broken but I'm not sure how far reaching they are, e.g. local laws, state laws, fed laws or simply misunderstood rule changes.

Your wording "what is clearly" needs some basis for how you arrived at that, before we could hope to be discussing any exceptions.

Call me presumptuous but I believe I understand what the Article spells out. It doesn't appear ambiguous to me.

message board home