Justice Thomas: SCOTUS Refusal to Hear Pennsylvania Election Cases Is 'Inexplicable'

we are SO SCREWED

His wife Ginni endorsed the 1/6 protest, demanded an overturn of the election, and sent 'LOVE' to demonstrators. He's not dissented to any of that.

That's inexplicable.

The Supreme Court is defending deep state control of US politics.

You people that are saying the supreme court has no jurisdiction are morons.

They have jurisdiction over everything.

That have the power to adjudicate the constitutionality of anything that's brought to them.

They make the final decision on whether a state's actions are constitutional or not.

I live in a country I no longer have a say in

And I'm expected to Pay it's bills.

Ginni Thomas, who once shared a meme alleging that liberal donor George Soros was involved in a conspiracy to launch a "silent coup" against Trump, apologized to Justice Thomas' staffers for her January 6 posts after the situation deteriorated into the riots that resulted in the deaths of five people.

"I owe you all an apology. I have likely imposed on you my lifetime passions," Thomas wrote the staff in emails. "My passions and beliefs are likely shared with the bulk of you, but certainly not all. And sometimes the smallest matters can divide loved ones for too long. Let's pledge to not let politics divide THIS family, and learn to speak more gently and knowingly across the divide."

[link to www.businessinsider.com (secure)]

She has a lot of kids to be threatened. I am sure they told her in no uncertain terms what would happen if she didn't go along.

I can't believe that we the American people are sitting around and letting this shit happen, there will be no future for our kids now and were fucking doing nothing about it

Totally explicable.

They're completely compromised, and are now nothing more than an invalid criminal/criminality-enabling dead and worthless 'institution'.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3...

hold the fuck up.. isnt this supposed to be a 3-6 court now? cOnSeRvAtIvE? fuck SCOTUS they are all in the pockets of the deep state.

:thisss:

Threatened? how awful.

have the balls to report the threat and leave the Court, if you cannot rule independently of the "threats".

Cowardly of them to use their children as an excuse to rob us of fair elections -

if that is their "reason" for being foolish cowards.

So if there is a sporting event and afterwards some fans go outside and do significant property damage and injuries, then are all fans of the team guilty?

There is no such thing as an unarmed "insurrection". That is an oxymoron and anyone claiming it is an insurrection is in fact a moron.

I did not vote unlike a lot of morons who did.

Trump has been nothing but a pressure valve holding back the explosive pressure of the populace.

If the politicians were honest in their evaluation then they would understand this fact. Instead they are psychopaths who are oblivious to the reality standing right in their faces.

You're wrong. There are no SOVEREIGN states, and the US Supreme Court clearly has jurisdiction over Presidential elections.

Thomas and Alito will likely be the last of their kind.

I have zero trust in ACB, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

They are from a younger generation that has been throughly indoctrinated by leftism.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to reject the review of two 2020 Pennsylvania presidential election cases Monday, but Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas believe they should have been given hearings.

In his dissent Justice Thomas argued mass mail-in voting, which was conducted in Pennsylvania for the first time ahead of the 2020 presidential election in November, combined with election rules being rewritten last minute, makes the process prone to fraud and mistrust.

"The Constitution gives to each state legislature authority to determine the 'Manner' of federal elections...Yet both before and after the 2020 election, nonlegislative officials in various States took it upon themselves to set the rules instead. As a result, we received an unusually high number of petitions and emer- gency applications contesting those changes. The petitions here present a clear example. The Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day," Thomas wrote. "Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended that deadline by three days. The court also ordered officials to count ballots received by the new deadline even if there was no evi- dence—such as a postmark—that the ballots were mailed by election day. That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set elec- tion rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable."

[link to townhall.com (secure)]

In his dissent Justice Thomas argued mass mail-in voting, which was conducted in Pennsylvania for the first time ahead of the 2020 presidential election in November, combined with election rules being rewritten last minute, makes the process prone to fraud and mistrust.

John Roberts: Catholic

Joe Biden: Catholic

Mike Pence: Catholic

Bill Barr: Catholic

Jack Dorsey: Catholic

Shall I continue?

The Supreme Court is defending deep state control of US politics.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to reject the review of two 2020 Pennsylvania presidential election cases Monday, but Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas believe they should have been given hearings.

In his dissent Justice Thomas argued mass mail-in voting, which was conducted in Pennsylvania for the first time ahead of the 2020 presidential election in November, combined with election rules being rewritten last minute, makes the process prone to fraud and mistrust.

"The Constitution gives to each state legislature authority to determine the 'Manner' of federal elections...Yet both before and after the 2020 election, nonlegislative officials in various States took it upon themselves to set the rules instead. As a result, we received an unusually high number of petitions and emer- gency applications contesting those changes. The petitions here present a clear example. The Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day," Thomas wrote. "Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended that deadline by three days. The court also ordered officials to count ballots received by the new deadline even if there was no evi- dence—such as a postmark—that the ballots were mailed by election day. That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set elec- tion rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable."

[link to townhall.com (secure)]

lol....why didnt Thomas dissent THEN???

You guys are so naive! Cant you see the fake legal jargon? Dissenting now is of NO use. If the SCOTUS wanted to revoke the elections it should have done in November-December when it was brought to court, NOT after the new government of Biden was sworn in on January 21. That case was a 9-0 defeat against Trump, in Biden's favor. Any revocation after that will cause a civil war.

Thomas also mentioned, the election result would not have changed.

In the Bush vs AL Gore case, the SCOTUS led by Protestant Rehnquist ruled in Bush's favor almost immediately, BEFORE the swearing-in, and all opposition was silenced.

They're throwing a red herring, to prevent Catholics being blamed. They know that people are onto them!

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3...

hold the fuck up.. isnt this supposed to be a 3-6 court now? cOnSeRvAtIvE? fuck SCOTUS they are all in the pockets of the deep state.

lol....why didnt Thomas dissent THEN???

You guys are so naive! Cant you see the fake legal jargon? Dissenting now is of NO use. If the SCOTUS wanted to revoke the elections it should have done in November-December when it was brought to court, NOT after the new government of Biden was sworn in on January 21. That case was a 9-0 defeat against Trump, in Biden's favor. Any revocation after that will cause a civil war.

Thomas also mentioned, the election result would not have changed.

In the Bush vs AL Gore case, the SCOTUS led by Protestant Rehnquist ruled in Bush's favor almost immediately, BEFORE the swearing-in, and all opposition was silenced.

They're throwing a red herring, to prevent Catholics being blamed. They know that people are onto them!