SCOTUS Joins the List of Failed American Institutions

SCOTUS Joins the List of Failed American Institutions

The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the lawsuit brought by the State of Texas against four states with obvious and severe election fraud problems is yet another marker of the collapse of institutional integrity in America.  Seven of the nine justices ran away from their core responsibility to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Perhaps they will redeem themselves by taking on one of the Sidney Powell-led appeals, but their disingenuous dismissal of the Texas case does not inspire hope.

Is it too harsh to characterize their decision as a collapse of institutional integrity and their dismissal as disingenuous?

Well, to dismiss on grounds that Texas lacks standing to bring the suit is classic intellectual gymnastics to misuse the language of ‘standing’ to mask what is really going on.  It exemplifies a lack of institutional integrity.

The Constitution specifically contemplates that there can be controversies between States, and specifically provides that the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction when a State is a complaining party.  Therefore, the State of Texas, acting through its Attorney General, has standing to bring the claim.  The question of standing is not honestly even arguable.

The same suit brought by the District Attorney of the City of Dallas could be dismissed for lack of standing—because the City of Dallas doesn’t have the standing to bring action in the name of and for the State of Texas.  But if the State of Texas, acting through its Attorney General, doesn’t have standing to bring a claim on behalf of the State of Texas, then the concept of standing has been rendered meaningless.

Justices Alito and Thomas essentially made this point in the comment accompanying the dismissal, when Alito stated his view (and Thomas joined) that the Constitution doesn’t allow for the Supreme Court to exercise discretion over whether to hear a complaint by one State against another.  So long as the claim is clearly brought by a State, the court is required to hear it and rule on the merits.  It could ultimately rule that the claim has no merit, but it can’t with integrity say the State of Texas has no standing to bring the claim.

So the majority of the Justices couching the dismissal for ‘lack of standing’ is dishonest and disingenuous.  What they were really doing is ruling on the merits of the Texas claim, and specifically ruling that the claim had no merit because Texas had no ‘judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections’.  This, too, is flat out disingenuous.

It is disingenuous because it uses a straw man/implied characterization of the Texas claim as if it were some sort of trivial objection to the way other States conduct elections—as if the nature of Texas complaint was over the color of the ballot paper or the font size used on ballots in other States.

Texas’ claim related specifically to the express provisions of the Constitution setting forth the appropriate State governing body that sets the rules for elections—namely, the State legislatures—and the incontrovertible fact that the States complained of had acted on rules NOT approved by their legislatures.  That is anything but trivial under the facts and circumstances of the 2020 election; it is precisely those not-approved-by-the-state-legislature-rules that opened up the middle-of-the-night counting of fraudulent mail in ballots that completed the theft of the election.

Every one of the nine Justices, including Trump’s three SCOTUS appointees—Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney-Barrett—know the truth of what they did, which is to use legal sophistry and intellectual gymnastics to run from their responsibilities. The Constitution expressly demands uniformity among the states in how election rules are established, and every State has a clear ‘justiciable interest’ in having the required uniformity respected and enforced, uniformly, especially when the evidence shows in this case that the failure to do so has had material adverse consequences on the people’s trust in the integrity of elections.

History may someday uncover why they did what they did.  The speculation for now will likely center on their wistful belief (or actual Swamp deal?) that the radical left’s post-election plan to pack the court will be set aside given that the court sided with the radical left to allow them to complete the steal.

An honest SCOTUS would have heard the Texas lawsuit, and stepped up to take a stand on the merits of the evidence of unconstitutional mail in ballot rules.  If Justices then honestly concluded all election rules were constitutional regardless of who enacted them and how they were enacted, they could and should have said so.  But they disingenuously ducked the substance of what is at issue, presumably believing they can hide behind some formerly noble notion of refraining from any action that could amount to the Supreme Court deciding elections.

But here’s the reality that 74+ million Americans know:  the 2020 election was stolen, with an in-your-face brazenness that is absolutely enraging to just about all 74+ million of them.  And whether SCOTUS likes it or not, their decisions ARE deciding the election—i.e., they ARE deciding whether the ‘steal’ will or will not be stopped.  And the American people see this.

It is beyond tragic that the ‘inside-the-Beltway’ disease apparently leads its official occupants—in the CIA, FBI, DOJ and now SCOTUS—to conclude that they are indeed a ruling class that is superior to ‘we the people’; that they carry a stature of wisdom and sophistication that the common American man and woman will be unable to see through and will ultimately defer to; and most consequential of all, that they are the arbiters of what shall or shall not be considered truth.

They have no idea how dangerously mistaken they are.  The American people know the truth about this election, and no legal gibberish by nine people in robes is going to camouflage or change that truth.  American patriots by the millions are livid at how their institutions have failed to stand up and protect and defend their beloved country under her Constitution.

The ruling class is going to learn what the Japanese learned after December 7, 1941:  the American people—not the ruling class—are the sleeping giant, and they are now awake and incensed at all those who would instigate, enable, facilitate or simply walk away from responsibility to stop the transparently planned Marxist overthrow and destruction of this country through a stolen election. The ruling class has no idea what it is unleashing.

Eric Georgatos blogs at America Can We Talk?