I don’t see why it couldn’t be, and you mentioned why: Bush v. Gore. If the courts need to move faster, they can move faster.
I do wonder what would happen if there actually wasn’t enough time, though. I do note one thing: Congress sets the date for the Electoral College to cast their votes, and could pass a law to change it. The date is not in the Constitution, just the fact that it is under Congress’s purview.
Thus fixing this problem of what to do if voter fraud is found is something Congress could pass a law to do.
Look at the Pentagon Papers case, New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971):
Sunday, June 13, 1971: The New York Times publishes their first “Vietnam Archive” article including classified information from the Pentagon Papers
Monday, June 14, 1971: The New York Times publishes their second article. Attorney General John Mitchell sends a cease and desist (by Telex). The Times indicate they will not comply and hold a press release.
The Trump team didn’t need a ruling by the next morning.
ETA: The newspaper prints every morning. Every day spent waiting means the right to freedom of the press is (potentially) being infringed. Can’t wait.
But look at the case about observation distance. They got that one very quickly, because it couldn’t wait. Every day without a ruling, rights were (potentially) being infringed.
If the Trumpists I’ve read on another forum are anything to go by, the “something big” is getting the matter into the Supreme Court, with witnesses and evidence and a jury and a trial presided over by a panel favourable to Mr. Trump. He can’t lose!
Problem is, that nobody explained to them that the Supreme Court of the United States is not a trial court; it is an appellate court. It does not have to accept the case at all, especially if it supports lower courts’ rulings. The evidence and witnesses have been presented at lower courts; and they are accepted as fact. Thus, there are not witnesses or other evidence presented, and there is no jury to try the facts. All there are, are legal arguments based on the facts found in lower courts.
But according to the Trumpists at that forum, this is the “something big.” If they lose at lower courts, that’s fine; they’ll just appeal up to the Supreme Court, where the real trial can take place.
SCOTUS has original jurisdiction, too. The United States could bring suit against a state directly in the high court if AG Barr so wished, see 28 U.S.C. 1251. You wouldn’t have a jury though.
The Republican party has ceased to be a political entity - they are now clearly a cult with anti-democratic political power, with their own set of data and information not aligned with reality. They are spineless cowards fearful of the wrath of Dear Leader and of threats of violence from his followers. Sad.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling was basically that the Trump team was jumping the line and needed to go back to the start. The Trump team basically had said they were trying to jump the line because there was no time to do it from the start.
In Wisconsin, the Trump campaign apparently only started filing these lawsuits in the past week, after waiting to decide on asking for a recount (but only in two counties which weren’t going to swing his way anyway), and then waiting for the results.
And, as far as I can tell, there’s nothing in those lawsuits which were dependent on seeing the results of the recounts – they’re about how the state ran their election, and there’s no reason why they could not have filed those weeks ago.
I strongly suspect that they waited until now because this is all political theater, and they know that they won’t win any of these – it’s about keeping the outrage going among Trump supporters, and getting them to continue to donate money towards “the cause.”
I want to know who the two individuals (I presume they are the same person) who voted for Trump on questions 1 and 3 are. They are delusional (and potential 2024 candidates for the Republican nomination IMHO…).
There’s a pretty good chance that most of the Republicans just didn’t bother answering. That’s how it looks to me anyway. It’s not that only 25 acknowledge Biden as the winner, it’s that most of them just didn’t give a shit enough about the survey to be arsed to answer.
As much as I hate Republicans right now, I believe most of them acknowledge Biden as the winner, even if they don’t bother answering that question in a survey.
Exactly right. Because, honestly, why would they? Many (most?) of them (and their supporters) see the Washington Post as biased at best and “the enemy” at worst. They have less than zero incentive to answer a “quiz” from a reporter at the Post.
