Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-13-2020, 09:35 PM
 
Location: 0.83 Atmospheres
11,474 posts, read 11,565,172 times
Reputation: 11986

Advertisements

If you are still clinging to hope for Trump, his legal strategy was dealt an effective death blow by a legendary conservative judge today. Trump went 0-9 today, bringing his legal record to 1-20, with the 1 win being meaningless in the big picture.

In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court that was handed down by two very conservative jurists, they invoked a Supreme Court case called Purcell. Under the Purcell principle, courts should not change election rules during the period of time just prior to an election because doing so could confuse voters and create problems for officials administering the election. The principle takes its name from Purcell v. Gonzalez, in which the Supreme Court reversed an October 2006 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit blocking an Arizona voter ID law during that year’s midterm election. The district court had initially denied the plaintiffs’ preliminary motion to block the law. The 9th Circuit’s ruling blocked the law until an appeal on the merits could be heard, in effect changing the rules for the November election. The Supreme Court based its decision on the short amount of time between the 9th Circuit’s order and the election, the need of Arizona election officials for clear guidance, and the 9th Circuit’s lack of an explanation for its decision.

This is a big blow to Trump as it essentially says that the courts should not be changing any election rules. this ruling doesn’t just impact the case in PA that it was specific to, but puts a major dent in his entire legal strategy.

https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203214p.pdf

Last edited by SkyDog77; 11-13-2020 at 10:48 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-13-2020, 09:46 PM
 
18,561 posts, read 7,378,460 times
Reputation: 11376
You are really confused. Trump hasn't asked to change any laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2020, 09:48 PM
 
Location: Georgia
2,707 posts, read 1,034,100 times
Reputation: 1723
No they didn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2020, 10:25 PM
 
Location: 0.83 Atmospheres
11,474 posts, read 11,565,172 times
Reputation: 11986
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post
You are really confused. Trump hasn't asked to change any laws.
I’m not confused. The court opinion is posted for your reading pleasure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 05:35 AM
 
59,112 posts, read 27,330,758 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
If you are still clinging to hope for Trump, his legal strategy was dealt an effective death blow by a legendary conservative judge today. Trump went 0-9 today, bringing his legal record to 1-20, with the 1 win being meaningless in the big picture.

In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court that was handed down by two very conservative jurists, they invoked a Supreme Court case called Purcell. Under the Purcell principle, courts should not change election rules during the period of time just prior to an election because doing so could confuse voters and create problems for officials administering the election. The principle takes its name from Purcell v. Gonzalez, in which the Supreme Court reversed an October 2006 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit blocking an Arizona voter ID law during that year’s midterm election. The district court had initially denied the plaintiffs’ preliminary motion to block the law. The 9th Circuit’s ruling blocked the law until an appeal on the merits could be heard, in effect changing the rules for the November election. The Supreme Court based its decision on the short amount of time between the 9th Circuit’s order and the election, the need of Arizona election officials for clear guidance, and the 9th Circuit’s lack of an explanation for its decision.

This is a big blow to Trump as it essentially says that the courts should not be changing any election rules. this ruling doesn’t just impact the case in PA that it was specific to, but puts a major dent in his entire legal strategy.

https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203214p.pdf
"In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court" which means it will go to the Supreme Court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Phoenix
30,377 posts, read 19,177,636 times
Reputation: 26270
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post
You are really confused. Trump hasn't asked to change any laws.
Nor have Trump's legal options been killed....obviously OP is clueless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 05:38 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
31,340 posts, read 14,274,675 times
Reputation: 27863
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
If you are still clinging to hope for Trump, his legal strategy was dealt an effective death blow by a legendary conservative judge today. Trump went 0-9 today, bringing his legal record to 1-20, with the 1 win being meaningless in the big picture.

In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court that was handed down by two very conservative jurists, they invoked a Supreme Court case called Purcell. Under the Purcell principle, courts should not change election rules during the period of time just prior to an election because doing so could confuse voters and create problems for officials administering the election. The principle takes its name from Purcell v. Gonzalez, in which the Supreme Court reversed an October 2006 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit blocking an Arizona voter ID law during that year’s midterm election. The district court had initially denied the plaintiffs’ preliminary motion to block the law. The 9th Circuit’s ruling blocked the law until an appeal on the merits could be heard, in effect changing the rules for the November election. The Supreme Court based its decision on the short amount of time between the 9th Circuit’s order and the election, the need of Arizona election officials for clear guidance, and the 9th Circuit’s lack of an explanation for its decision.

This is a big blow to Trump as it essentially says that the courts should not be changing any election rules. this ruling doesn’t just impact the case in PA that it was specific to, but puts a major dent in his entire legal strategy.

https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203214p.pdf
Nope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 05:40 AM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,497,191 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court" which means it will go to the Supreme Court.
They used as a platform on which to base their decision, a precedent set by the Supreme Court.

Hardly think the Supreme Court is going to overturn itself on a decision they made as late as 2006!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 05:41 AM
 
2,445 posts, read 1,068,779 times
Reputation: 2988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
Nor have Trump's legal options been killed....obviously OP is clueless.
Thank you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2020, 07:59 AM
 
Location: 0.83 Atmospheres
11,474 posts, read 11,565,172 times
Reputation: 11986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
Nor have Trump's legal options been killed....obviously OP is clueless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"In a decision by the Federal Appeals Court" which means it will go to the Supreme Court.
Of course, they are free to appeal. What you guys are missing here is that this was a ruling handed down that invalidated his strategy across the country, not just specific to the individual case AND it was given by two very conservative judges, one of whom is a legend in conservative judicial circles. And keep in mind, that is IF the Supreme Court decides that they want to weigh in.

The was a VERY significant loss. They have yet to have a single meaningful court win.

Last edited by SkyDog77; 11-14-2020 at 08:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:06 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top