Hacker News Reader

Comment by greggturkington | Hacker News Reader

And Trump's team had tens of lawsuits across Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, and Michigan. Many of them dismissed without merit.

You're comparing that to Bush v Gore?!

View on HN

What's wrong with lawsuits? You should want the election contested legally. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

I agree you should want the election contested legally.

Trump and his attorneys falsely asserting widespread election fraud in public statements you should not want.

Absolutely agree. We should want elections contested legally, in the courts, no matter what the whacked out crazy or inherently false claims there might be. That's what the courts are there for and it's really IMO why they are a third branch, not a subsidiary, of the government. Let the lawsuits go forward. Let the courts decide on their merits, so we have finality and case law for the future. IMHO it was a mistake for the Supreme Court not to hear the Texas lawsuit. It almost certainly was not going to prevail, but by summarily declining to even hear the case, it undermines the judiciaries independence.

The courts DID decide on the Texas case, though. When a case is presented to the SC that "is almost certainly not going to prevail", this often (and undoubtedly so in the texas case) means that there is a fundamental misunderstanding or misrepresentation of law that is so egregious there is no opinion to be had. This is exactly what the SC justices said in this case:

> The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot. [1]

The courts essentially decided the cases have no merit to rule on.

[1] https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p86...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com