How will this new evidence of "massive voter fraud be presented at SCOTUS if its an appellate court?
Am I missing something. I keep seeing people talk about how trumps teem is saving massive evidence for SCOTUS, but I don't see how that woild work if SCOTUS is an appellate court.
My apologies for the spelling errors.
- StephenWeinsteinLv 72 months ago
Strictly speaking, you're wrong. In certain very rare types of cases, the Supreme Court acts more like a regular court, decides the case itself, and can allow evidence to be presented directly to it if it wishes (but usually doesn't); it does not act as an appellate court in these cases. However, this can occur only in cases "affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party", and normally occurs only in cases in which one state sues another state (in part because ambassadors and consuls usually have diplomatic immunity from any cases against them, but mostly because cases in which only one party is a state are usually heard by other courts). In practice, it happens an average of only once a year, and, even in these cases, the evidence is usually presented to a special master rather than the court.
Did someone really tell you they were saving evidence for the supreme court?
- New World ManLv 62 months ago
They have NOTHING so far, and can NOT show anything in SCOTUS that was not shown in lower courts.
Bottom line - no matter who hears the case - even if they do go out-side of how they normally work - Trump STILL LOSES because there is no massive fraud that simple!
Biden - 306
Trump - 232
That's ALL there is to it!
They don’t have evidence, and they’re not permitted to present new evidence or wittinesses to the SCOTUS; that’s not how appeals work.