If it please the court — or not!
Forget the Russians. Our Democrat(ic) acquaintances are doing all they can to destabilize American governance.
Bad enough that the liberal-progressive-socialist party never accepted the results of the 2016 election. (Did Hillary ever concede? Increasingly clear that Obama holdovers in the Justice Department aided and abetted her Russian collusion hoax. Impeachment over a phone call?)
Now the American Left is doing its best to scramble Election Day, to leave the results pending for weeks — dependent upon a clutch of newly discovered ballots in this obscure post office loading dock here and that back room there.
“Another day, another judge unilaterally revising election rules.”
The Wall Street Journal wrote that even before a federal judge jury-rigged Wisconsin’s vote-counting. Federal Judge William Conley, appointed by President Obama, obliged a rash of Democrat(ic) lawsuits to extended the deadline for counting mailed by almost a week after Election Day!
This drive-by legislating from the bench follows that of Michigan, where a liberal judge ordered poll workers to keep counting ballots even if they are 14 days late! (Need more exclamation points!) That lawsuit was the handiwork of a Democrat front group.
In another swing state, Pennsylvania, judges bumped bumped the ballot deadline to Nov. 6, including for those without a postmark!
⇒ ‘We’re less than 45 days from the election, and the rules are being rewritten on the fly by judges …’
Here’s a thought: how about allowing duly constituted election officials to determine election rules? No great constitutional equal rights issue is at stake here. No racial or sexual discrimination is alleged. No one who takes reasonable care is deprived of the vote. If the coronavirus epidemic is a consideration, then use good old-fashioned prudence and mail those ballots sooner rather than later.
State legislatures alone!
The Supreme Court’s 1892 McPherson v. Blacker decision makes clear that the Constitution squarely places the manner of choosing Electoral College electors in the hands of the state legislatures, not in the courts or state executive offices. The state legislatures have discretion to direct how those electors are chosen, including by what means the popular vote is used to do so, and to establish procedures to govern contested elections. — former deputy attorney general George Terwilliger 3rd.
Blaska’s Bottom Line: All of which makes an imperative case for naming that successor to the Notorious RBG, asap. Three reasons: if Gore v. Bush 2000 was bad, consider a 4 to 4 tie. Second, this nation needs an antidote to activist judges that consider themselves uber-legislators. Third, if judges can jerk around election procedures 45 days before an election, a President and a Senate scheduled to remain in office another 78 days (at least) can name Justice Ginsburg’s successor.