First, only a Godless evil F##K bent on pi$$ing in the face of the One True Creator God would try to name a human court the “Supreme Court”.
Second, if this rubber stamp for pedophile evil and farming the American cattle was a real court, in 1861 they would have had the War Criminal Lincoln arrested, tried and hanged for wiping his Marxist (red Russian communism) a$$ on the constitution, killing the Revolutionary’s Volunteer Union, replacing it with a communist military dictatorship thinly disguised as a “constitutional republic”.
If the High Court had done their damn job in 1861, there would not have been a war crime by the USA in which the USA murdered an estimated 850,000 Americans, America would not be a 3ed world dung heap, and my Occupied by the USA militarily in a continuing war crime for 155 years and counting Republic of Texas would not be occupied, a 3ed world $#it hole where little children freeze to death in their beds while the Politicians talk S#it to Puta’s in Cancun!
The “supreme” court is like everything else in DC, a very badly written and preformed Soap Opera.
None of it is real.
All of DC/USA is a bull S#it show to keep the sheep entertained while Uncle Sugar unzips his blood stained pants and bends the American People Over.
There were men who figured out in the 1800s voting in DC’s elections was meaningless.
I betcha where the majority of the sheep have their heads, it smells like this!
The Ole Dog!
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion regarding the high court’s decision not to take up a case challenging the Pennsylvania Nov. 3 election results.
The court on Monday announced it won’t take up lawsuits challenging a Pennsylvania state court decision that relaxed ballot-integrity measures, including a move to extend the ballot-receipt deadline during the November election by three days due to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Former President Donald Trump and Pennsylvania’s GOP urged the court to take up a review of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling.
“This is not a prescription for confidence,” Thomas wrote on Monday, adding that “changing the rules in the middle of the game is bad enough.” Thomas, considered by many to be the most conservative justice, said the court should have granted a review.
“That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas wrote (pdf). “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”
Other than Thomas, Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch also dissented.
“If state officials have the authority they have claimed, we need to make it clear. If not, we need to put an end to this practice now before the consequences become catastrophic,” Thomas, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush, also wrote.