Hillary Clinton's wacky response to Supreme Court case

 Fox News:

Hillary Clinton is peddling a "disinformation campaign" about a pending Supreme Court election law case by claiming Republicans are scheming to "literally steal" the 2024 presidential election, according to legal experts reached by Fox News Digital.

The failed 2016 presidential candidate claimed Tuesday that, "Right-wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential election. And they’re not making a secret of it." She charged that the "right-wing-controlled Supreme Court may be poised to rule on giving state legislatures the power to overturn presidential elections."

Legal experts say, however, that Clinton appears to be referencing and amplifying misinformation about an upcoming Supreme Court case, Moore v. Harper, over whether a state court appropriately rejected the legislature's congressional redistricting plan.

"Hillary is pushing the Left's disinformation campaign when she says the Court may rule in Moore v. Harper to give state legislatures the power to overturn presidential elections," Carrie Severino, president of JCN, told Fox News Digital. "The process for selecting presidential electors is not even before the Court in this case."

"But even assuming a state legislature were to try something that politically suicidal, it lacks the power to override Congress's determination of election day and to ignore its own election rules, both of which it would be doing in such a scenario," Severino added.

The case, set for oral argument Dec. 7, stems from a lawsuit by the GOP-controlled North Carolina General Assembly over a state court's invalidation of congressional redistricting maps from the 2020 census.

North Carolina lawmakers will argue that the U.S. Constitution gives sole authority to regulate federal elections to state legislatures, and say the state court could not point to any example of how the new maps violated state law. Instead, the lawmakers argue, the court engaged in "unfettered policymaking" by rejecting the maps based on a broad state commitment to hold "free" and "fair" elections.

Clinton made a leap from there to suggest that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of North Carolina, the 2024 presidential election could somehow be decided by Republican-controlled state legislatures.
...

This litigation is over the state's redistricting plan which would have no control over the presidential election.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more