I think that core arguments are that creation of new requirements and procedures by for mail-in ballots by the governor is a violation of the US constitution, and the new procedures ignore many of the safeguards present in with in-person voting.
The Constitution is clear that the state legislature sets the rules: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress . . . Article 2, section 1
This is a stupid argument as the legislature is but one of three branches in a state. These are local state issues and the federal constitution reserves the power to the state. By putting the thumb on the scale for the legislature, the federal government would be interfering with the local politics of the state.
Next thing I’ll hear is governors can’t veto election bill because the US constitution doesn’t specifically state that or election bills are not subject to any judicial oversight. It’s patently ridiculous and constitutionally illiterate.
And in the Detroit MI poll workers training class, instructors taught the workers how to manipulate poll watchers, and count all ballots including late and challenged ballots No corruption here, you there now move along! Mff Mff
The executive has made changes without the consent of the legislature. That appears to be an direct violation of the US Constitution. In contrast, the Constitution is explicit that the executive may make temporary appointments for Senators:
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. 17th amendment
There is no provision in the federal constitution for the executive to override the legislature related to selection of presidential electors.
The elections haven’t been certified yet, but so far there hasn’t been any proven fraud on either side.It seems that the election went relatively smooth. No evidence had been brought before a court. No names named. Nothing.
“This morning, we received a redacted Affidavit that does not contain the individual’s name, signature or contact information. As it stands, our office has not yet received a formal complaint and cannot conduct an investigation without such critical details. This office takes allegations of voter fraud extremely seriously and works with our elections officials, as well as law enforcement partners in Nevada and other states, to investigate and prosecute voter fraud when warranted by the evidence.”
Over the weekend, a lawsuit was filed in Detroit by two poll observers, also known as “challengers,” alleging a wide range of fraud claims. The suits, which includes affidavits signed by five poll challengers and one City of Detroit employee, asks officials to “void the election” and order a new one in Wayne County.
I don’t ever want to hear"both sides are the same"
One side lost a close election, said this sucked, and yes mobilized the next day to ensure that they would win the next election.
The other side throw baseless claims, ridiculous lawsuits, and non stop crap against the wall that even if accurate (and it’s not) doesn’t change enough votes in enough states to change the outcome but does weaken the faith in the American voting proccess.
No, both sides are not the same. One side loves America even though sometimes doesn’t love who the American People vote for.
The other side wants to create so much chaos and doubt that the American system is broken beyond repair all because they can’t take defeat.