If democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner, then a republic is the sheep in possession of an AR-15.
The Supreme Court refused to hear the lawsuit filed Monday by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The State of Texas asserted that the rights half the country were violated by the ostensible refusal of 4 states – Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin – to follow their own election laws and/or respective state constitutions.
The summery of the unsigned decision reads: “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.”
Predicably this has provided near-infinite fodder for legal scholars. Here is what I’ve managed to glean:
Pro-SCOTUS:
Bottom Line: you can’t have states running to SCOTUS every time they are not happy with an election result.
Follow up: One state, in this case, Texas, does not have ‘standing’ or legal grounds with respect to how another state conducts its elections. No other facts are relevant. State legislators ultimately decide if the election within their jurisdiction was conducted fairly and within the margin of fraud. The state legislators are empowered to send whichever slate of electors to the Electoral College they choose, based on their interpretation of the popular vote. A willingness to legitimize Texas’ grievance, regardless of how many other states join them, would be a violation of Federalism (State’s rights) in the extreme.
Con-SCOTUS:
Bottom Line: The Court must hear the case when one state brings suit against another. Article III, section 2 impels the court: “The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases… to Controversies between two or more States…” This extends to mutual disputes as well as lawsuits.
Follow up: Election laws have a lot in common with insurance laws. Diversity does not provide a benefit here. Uniformity is better with respect to both insurance and elections laws. Elections benefit from certainty and an even keel. Parties who fail to keep their contract cause instability and worse, chaos. Uniformity of elections laws are essential to a functioning Republic, and are part and parcel of Ordered Liberty. Without uniformity and stability, one state’s lack of safeguards will have a detrimental effect on the citizens of other states, effectively invalidating their votes.
The Future of The Republic
The Consequences To Our Freedom
SCOTUS has ensured that going forward, elections will become simply a game where the side that manages to stuff the most ballots into the box wins. Not exactly conducive to keeping The Republic. Blue states and counties have stripped all safeguards from the process. Since courts from the state to the federal level up to and including the Supreme Court have blessed off on this process, it would be tactically stupid for red counties and states not to do the same. Otherwise, forget about anyone or any center-right cause winning at the ballot box ever again, and accept the United States descending into a one-party Soviet-style nation.
Consider – if one can get away with a 100% – 200% turnout in a given county, what’s to stop any party from stuffing millions of ballots in a county with only 100,000 or so registered voters?
The Take-Away & With Respect To Our Liberty
The side which that is a greater threat to domestic tranquility always wins. This of course creates its own set of problems. Give in to the mob, and they will be back. Just ask the ancient kings of England. Savages have one overarching trait. Terminal discontentment. You have no interest in savages. Fine. It doesn’t matter. Because they are intensely interested in you, and no degree of appeasement will ever work. Norman Americans are like the frog in the pot with the heat being turn up ever so slowly. Like the wife coming across her ballet shoes in the bottom drawer, or the husband looking at his fishing gear hanging in the garage for the last decade. At some point we’re going to ask ourselves, “what happened?” What happened to our Republic? Indeed, what happened to our right to pursue happiness? What happened indeed.
Human Nature Being What It Is…
The United States is careening toward a dreadful reckoning. No one wants to take the blame for having a hand in that. That includes Chief Justice John Roberts and the entire panel. Still, claiming “no decision” is still a decision. A cowardly one to be sure, but one that gives some coverage. I get it. What if they heard the case and what if SCOTUS rules the four states in question have violated the rights of the other forty-six? Further, what if the mail-in ballots, in a separate ruling turn out to be unconstitutional on the State and Federal level and thrown out? Do the thugs on The Left burn the nation from coast to coast? It’s what they’ve threatened to do. So, it makes sense (to SCOTUS, at least) to kick the can down the road.
It’s a mistake. A mistake on par with the Three-fifths’ Compromise. Our Founders didn’t see it coming, and with the resulting deaths of 680,000 Americans, it’s easy to pass judgment. Will delaying action on voter fraud result in something similar? That’s crystal ball stuff. What we do know for certain? That this issue will not go away and we need to address it. Sooner or later. Sooner is better.
Selah.
