Accountability Elections Trump

Wall Street Journal: Time for Trump to Concede

Interesting essay samples and examples on: https://essays.io/dissertation-examples-samples/

The Wall Street Journal is one of the most conservative editorial voices in the nation. Today its editorial says that the Electoral College has decided the election. Biden won. Trump lost. Trump should concede.

The Electoral College meets Monday to cast its votes for President, officially marking Joe Biden as the election winner. President Trump’s legal challenges have run their course, and he and the rest of the Republican Party can help the country and themselves by acknowledging the result and moving on.

Mr. Trump’s last legal gasp came Friday evening when the Supreme Court declined to hear the Texas lawsuit seeking to overturn the election results in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. As we predicted, the Court cited Texas’s lack of legal standing to challenge how another state manages its elections. 

Some on the right claim that Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, but this is wrong. The Justices said they would have taken the Texas case as a “bill of complaint” when states sue other states. 

This is a technical point that concerns the Court’s case management, and the two Justices have a long-time view that the Court should hear more of these direct state appeals. We happen to agree, but in this case the Texas claim was outside constitutional bounds. Justice Alito (joined by Justice Thomas) added that he would “not grant other relief.” This was not a dissent on the merits of the Texas claim.

Mr. Trump and his camp are attacking the Court, and the President is deriding the “standing” point as a dodge. It is much more than that. Limits on standing are fundamental to a conservative understanding of the proper judicial role under Article III of the Constitution. If anyone can sue without a cognizable injury and the possibility of remedy, the courts would be overwhelmed with frivolous claims.

There is more to the editorial but I don’t subscribe and this is the free content available to me. Note: Even if Alito and Thomas had dissented, which they did not, the vote would have been a decisive 7-2 against Trump’s frivolous claim. It was 9-0 against Trump’s frivolous claim. At what point do courts begin to fine and punish lawyers for repeatedly filing frivolous claims?

Related posts

Carol Burris: Joe Roy, a Hero of Public Education

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Who Signed the Pro-Testing Appeals?

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Who Are the Sacklers? The Billionaires Who Make Oxycontin and Fund Charter Schools

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Steve Hinnefeld: The Supreme Court’s Mistaken View of American History in the Espinoza Decision

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Ohio: A Win Against Charter’s Effort to Evade Accountability

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Jan Resseger: Teachers in West Virginia Forego a Pay Raise to Block Charters and Vouchers

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Who Benefits from Unlimited Expansion of Charter Schools?

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Nancy Bailey: 8 Ways to Save Public Schools from Draconian Budget Cuts

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Justice for George Floyd

V4tgDpeDBhQGUBa7

Leave a Comment