A federal complaint filed by the Trump campaign alleging constitutional violations in Pennsylvania is seen as “superb legal work” that could take the case to the United States Supreme Court, according to legal expert James V. Delong.
Delong’s last play in American thinker explains why it was a brilliant strategy for the Trump team to file their lawsuit in federal court rather than state court.
The bottom line is that some of the state’s actions, and in particular the exclusion of Republican scrutineers when counting hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots, violated federal constitutional requirements.
The federal filing alleging constitutional violations means that a Conservative-majority SCOTUS could be forced to vote on the matter, most likely in favor of Trump, rather than “a politicized Pennsylvania court” having the final say.
A SCOTUS review would likely shed light on the various constitutional violations of excluding poll observers and secret ballot counting, corroborating the Trump team’s larger point of massive voter fraud.
As my former professors of constitutional law at Harvard would have said, “to ask the question is to answer it”. It is difficult to count all the constitutional guarantees violated here: equal protection, due process, privileges and immunities. Indeed, the complaint stacks up the Supreme Court’s precedents to support its arguments, including the long string of resounding statements in the chain of one person, one vote decisions.
“Even the late Justice Ginsburg, who has never encountered a progressive argument that she could not support, would find it difficult to uphold such a law,” writes DeLong, former editor of the Harvard Law Journal.
Different from Bush V. Gore 2000 decision, in which SCOTUS took a slight step not to undermine the Florida Supreme Court, “The Trump case in Pennsylvania does not have the complication of the interaction between state and federal law, because it jumps above state law and, as noted, relies on a host of American SCOTUS cases on the importance of voting. “
DeLong believes similar complaints may soon be filed by the Trump team in other swing states where “perhaps we see the revelation of a large-scale effort to corrupt the elections,” proof of which has been provided. by Joe Biden himself.
Joe Biden has claimed Democrats are mounting the biggest campaign fraud effort in history, and a good rule of thumb is when someone tells you they’re about to fuck you, believe them.
It is therefore possible that a number of cases will be taken to the Supreme Court in about three weeks.
DeLong said that despite the decision made in 2000 by George W. Bush, the decision to win the victory for George W.
Everyone in the legal world assumes that the judges, bruised by the excoriation the Court received about Bush against Gore (even if the result was right), would never put themselves in a position to overturn the apparent results of a presidential election. This assumption is the reason for Democrats’ efforts to create a compelling bandwagon effect, but the president’s lawyers may have thwarted them. Judges may have no choice but to decide on the election, one way or the other, and be left with the choice of overturning the results claimed by the media or ratifying massive fraud.
SCOTUS ‘reputation, DeLong says, rests largely on the nine judges who correctly interpret the Constitution.
The legitimacy of the court could survive and even be strengthened by a carefully explained reversal of the initial results. He could not survive a fierce ratification of an obvious fraud. If Trump’s lawyers are making their case factually, the court must agree.
Follow the author on Gab: https://gab.ai/adansalazar
On Twitter: Follow @AdanSalazarWins
On Speak: https://parler.com/profile/adansalazar/
On Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/adan.salazar.735
On the Spirits: https://www.minds.com/adan_infowars
Look: Election officer walks up, claims ballots were illegally altered in Detroit.
#Trumps #Pennsylvania #lawsuit #superb #piece #legal #craft #legal #scholar #Dateway