Episode #27
Today on Categorical Imperatives I endeavor to show why, conservatives who are upset over the Texas election case do not understand the Texas lawsuit they support, nor the entirely justified and predictable outcome of that case. That the Supreme Court was correct in dismissing the case for a lack of standing and explain WHY that decision is Constitutionally sound.
Why the Texas suit is entirely non-meritorious, how the procedural obstacles and lack of proof of jurisdiction required under original jurisdiction were not met and how the injunctive relief Texas was seeking was not only extreme, but insanely unconstitutional on numerous grounds. Violating fundamental tenants of Federalism, separation of powers, the anti-commandeering doctrine and the political questions doctrine to name just a few Constitutional principles this case runs afoul of.
We further discuss how the only issue they mentioned was standing, because it only takes one eliminating disqualification to leave the case as a whole lacking in merit. I did not make this episode to be a dick or say "I told you so"...
Because as I stated in the show, I have much respect for many of the people whose position I am criticizing. I am simply analyzing this case through the interpretive lenses of constitutional originalism and statutory textualism.
Links
Opposition to Motion for Leave briefs:
Subscribe to the Legale§e Newsletter You will get notifications for all new content, whether it’s articles, podcasts or videos!
Visit the Legale§e Podcast homepage to learn more about the show, get updates, contact me, buy my book, find links to my social media & more!
Follow
Support
BUY MY NEW BOOK
Constitutional Sleight Of Hand: An explicit history of implied powers Now Available on Amazon
Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in areas of law, politics & culture.
Legale§e is a subscriber-supported project. Please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.