RedState: Four years ago, Nebraska filed a motion in the Supreme Court seeking permission to file a complaint against Colorado over issues involving Colorado’s passage of legislation that legalized the recreational use of marijuana in contravention of federal law. Nebraska alleged that its interests as a state were harmed by that legislation.
The Supreme Court denied the motion.
Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the denial, and he was joined in his dissent by Justice Samuel Alito.
Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor were together in denying the motion.
Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Ginsburg are no longer on the Court.
What Justice Thomas wrote in his dissent is something that I was not aware of until doing a bit of research on the claims raised by Texas, and looking more closely at the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on its “original jurisdiction.”
The first paragraph of Justice Thomas’ dissent read as follows:
Federal law does not, on its face, give this Court discretion to decline to decide cases within its original jurisdiction. Yet the Court has long exercised such discretion, and does so again today in denying, without explanation, Nebraska and Oklahoma’s motion for leave to file a complaint against Colorado. I would not dispose of the complaint so hastily. Because our discretionary approach to exercising our original jurisdiction is questionable, and because the plaintiff States have made a reasonable case that this dispute falls within our original and exclusive jurisdiction, I would grant the plaintiff States leave to file their complaint.
As noted, by joining Justice Thomas’s dissent, Justice Alito signaled he agreed with Justice Thomas’s view on whether the Court must hear cases involving claims made by one state against another state.
Justice Thomas went on to explain his view:
Fingers and toes crossed that we have the other ‘members’ of the Thomas court to put this on the full docket.
My thinking is that SCOTUS, due to the high stakes/national attention of the dispute, has to and will hear this case.
Unlike the other day when they denied the Penn. motion, this is a bit different. That one involved the Constitutionality of mail in ballots, SCOTUS is not going to get involved on matters of a states rights issue.
But this one is different in that each state can clearly demonstrate “standing”, namely that their state was directly impacted because it invalidates the collective count, which each state is a member of.
Now whether the suit will ultimately prevail, and if it does how will the disputed votes counted, who the hell knows?
I’m not holding my breath for either the Supreme Court or our President to save this Republic.
The States may get one shot at it at some point. If that fails, it will be up to US.
The court has original jurisdiction. There simply is nowhere else to hear disputes between states. Any Justice who does not understand this should not be a Justice.
That said, I am worried about the “standing” issue in the Texas suit. The argument for standing is the weak part of an otherwise very substantial case. The standing issue would not be a concern, IMO, if Bill Barr would get off his fat ass and join the United States as a co-plantiff.
The Supreme Court may not save us but,
The Insurrection Act will.
The Supreme Court may hear the States case, but don’t count on Barrett, Kavanagh and especially Roberts, to vote in their favor. It will take a miracle for them not to agree with the leftist justices.
Thomas and Alito are the only true conservatives on the Supreme Court.
They believe ‘up to us’ means we will be angry and disappointed, have some peaceful protests waiving American and Trump flags but at the end of the day nothing will happen and they get to continue their cushy lives. The alternative is they become the most hated and reviled people in America, the left comes for them, their families and burns down the country. I hope I’m wrong but I do not see Kavanaugh and Gorsuch as men that are going to have the backbone required. Nothing I’ve seen to date from either of them gives me any confidence they are anything other than left of center leaning elitists picked by the Federalist Society.
if scotus does not hear this very serious case of obvious and blatant election fraud they have rendered themselves irrelevant
If they don’t take this it will set precedent that we have no recourse to dispute an election. This has to be heard or the whole country is disenfranchised.
Hearing the case is the first hill and the correct rendering is the motion is the mountain.
At this point I agree with Tiger Eyes, the insurrection act is our hope.
of the motion sorry!
Despite all that’s been revealed we still don’t know how deeply this government is compromised. It is clear enough that it’s very badly infiltrated and it’ll take a miracle to come out on the other side without being deeply scarred if we survive at all.
Gorsuch is #3. Who else?
Remember Amy has split loyalties; she belongs to some of the “elite” country clubs the Clintons and Bushes do. She will be torn ; as was Barr, for the same reason.
“…we still don’t know how deeply this government is compromised.” -gin blossom
Therein lies the problem with Trump invoking the Insurrection Act.
Don’t count on it.
He has very few allies in the Federal Government.
Special Forces
Hearing disagreements between states IS the reason for the Supreme Court !
There will be violence from the left if the court splits along partisan lines, sad to say, and I don’t trust the above mentioned “conservative” judges.
Let’s put it this way. SCOTUS will be meaningless from here on out if they do not deal with this according to the Constitution. There is only one correct decision regarding the fraud and treachery perpetrated upon this nation.
Sidestep this or give an unconstitutional, bs answer and the court stops having a reason to exist.
I would hope, if they have 1/2 brain, that they will understand that where’s there’s no justice, there will be fire!!!
I can imagine the headline when Ted Cruz argues in front of the Supremes: “Huge Wild Boar Runs Amok Before Supreme Court”.
That would stop Ruthie Gator’s heart right then and there if she was still alive and wrigglin’.
Honestly though, I wish him well and hopes to heck he convinces them of election fraud.
@Gin Blossom – I was wondering the same? But that said the POTUS, DJT, MUST have something goin’, as IN his Columbo moment?? Is that was is goin on in the backround?
I was also wondering IF the SCOTUS has seen the 17% county map that Hiden won. Along the lines of what you are a sayin’…
I hope they are not just worried about the cities freaking out, because some others might as well, like in the 83% other counties…