Unfortunately, the supreme court has zero checks and balances, and recently has been willing to make partisan political rulings, so it may well strike it down to help Republicans.
They can. They have. They will again. The states have the constitutional right to select their electors as they choose, but this court has demonstrated complete contempt for justice and fairness.
The supreme court also overruled states trying to ban interracial marriage, implement poll taxes to unfairly target poor people, and place signs in their yard protesting war.
How could they? At the end of the day isn’t it up to the states to decide who their electoral votes go?
Unfortunately, the supreme court has zero checks and balances, and recently has been willing to make partisan political rulings, so it may well strike it down to help Republicans.
How could they make a president immune from any checks and balances?
How could they allow states to enforce draconian laws against the homeless?
How could they work towards ending voting rights?
How could they give lower judges the power to overrule experts?
They can. They have. They will again. The states have the constitutional right to select their electors as they choose, but this court has demonstrated complete contempt for justice and fairness.
The supreme court also overruled states trying to ban interracial marriage, implement poll taxes to unfairly target poor people, and place signs in their yard protesting war.
I was pulling from the current court, but yes. It’s almost like giving nine unelected geriatrics the ultimate authority on all laws isn’t a good idea.
You missed the one saying it’s okay to execute innocent people.
This one
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/supreme-court-prioritizes-expedience-not-justice-wrongful-convictions-2022-05-25/