The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday
rejected the Trump campaign's challenge to last-minute changes in Pennsylvania, suggesting the election being over renders the issue "moot" and disregarding the ramifications of such rule changes for future elections.
At issue was the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's
decision to allow election officials to count mail ballots that arrived up to three days after Election Day 2020. The U.S. Supreme Court voted 4-4 on whether to issue a stay of that ruling, falling short of the majority needed to block it.
"The Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting, except in narrow and defined circumstances," Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
argued in December. "Late last year, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail-in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution's express prohibition. This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game."
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch were the only
dissenters from the decision. Because only four votes are necessary to grant a writ of certiorari, either of former President Donald Trump's other appointees to the nation's highest court, Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett, would have been enough to make the Court hear the case.
Comment: It gets worse, because the children's health will undoubtedly suffer yet another case of adult-driven ideological possession. It's worth noting that France's eating habits are famous in Europe for being beneficial to health. So much so that in the 80's, and pondered regularly by researchers, the catchphrase known as the 'French paradox' was born. Because, contrary to warped, worldwide government dietary guidelines, despite the French eating larger quantities of saturated fat, they actually had some of the lowest rates of heart disease and obesity in Europe.
See also: