A scotus justice intervened in 2000 for shrub so why cant one now for the rights of voters

[libtodeath]

in California,New York or Illinois?

With the news of the Russian hack of our election couldnt one of the justices that oversee a blue state order a halt to the EC voting until more investigation is done?


Cross posting this from GD.

We only have a few days left.

[jberryhill]

1. Courts don't just "intervene"

They rule on cases brought before them by the litigants.

[libtodeath]

3. Right,so cant the Clinton or Stein campaign petition them?

How about the ACLU representing disenfranchised voters in blue states?

[jberryhill]

7. It's not quite as simple as that

[mythology]

8. For what?

The process for determining the president is clear. Why would you think it's suddenly unconstitutional? That makes no sense.

[sweetapogee]

9. I have decided that you are the best person to

take this case to the SC.

Do it.

[HassleCat]

2. Obvious answer

Because the Supremes exist to make sure the downtrodden cannot threaten the privileged.

[putitinD]

4. I believe that is what will happen.

[libtodeath]

5. I am hoping and why President Obama did what he did yesterday about cyberhacking.

[uponit7771]

6. +1