BRUNSON VS BIDEN
J C s Take
Today the Supreme Court will consider the case of Brunson v. Biden, which I reported about back on December 2nd, along with a lengthy list of other cases vying for Supreme Court certiorari. The case is on today’s calendar for a private conference vote by the Justices. It takes four Justices voting “yes” to move a case to the argument calendar. Very, very few cases pass that bar. We should find out on Monday. Brunson’s petition argues that 385 members of congress, as well as Biden, Harris, and Mike Pence, all broke their oaths by failing to investigate fraud claims in 2020, and by certifying the presidential election over the objections of a handful of courageous lawmakers seeking an investigation. Brunson now asks the Supreme Court to remove from office all those officials plus all the agency heads Biden has appointed since infesting the White House. It’s an extreme long shot, if not a Constitutionally impossible one, as I explained in my previous post. Honestly, I don’t see it happening. Feel free to root for the case if you want, but I’m worried about a lot of folks who seem to have pinned their hopes on some kind of miracle happening, which is what it would take.”>Today the Supreme Court will consider the case of Brunson v. Biden, which I reported about back on December 2nd, along with a lengthy list of other cases vying for Supreme Court certiorari. The case is on today’s calendar for a private conference vote by the Justices. It takes four Justices voting “yes” to move a case to the argument calendar. Very, very few cases pass that bar. We should find out on Monday. Brunson’s petition argues that 385 members of congress, as well as Biden, Harris, and Mike Pence, all broke their oaths by failing to investigate fraud claims in 2020, and by certifying the presidential election over the objections of a handful of courageous lawmakers seeking an investigation. Brunson now asks the Supreme Court to remove from office all those officials plus all the agency heads Biden has appointed since infesting the White House. It’s an extreme long shot, if not a Constitutionally impossible one, as I explained in my previous post. Honestly, I don’t see it happening. Feel free to root for the case if you want, but I’m worried about a lot of folks who seem to have pinned their hopes on some kind of miracle happening, which is what it would take.
If only all the justices were named Clarence Thomas then we would have a shot….
Perhaps it doesn’t matter, but what is the precise Constitutional language in force when a challenge is presented? I remember reading that 100 MOC supported the challenge at the time.
How much weasel room does SCOTUS have under these circumstances? Because to sidestep this provision means effectively to eviscerate it.