More Sound and Fury

 For the life of me, I’ve been trying to figure out how to describe the lack of merits of the Texas Supreme Court case without sounding partisan. So instead, let me quote from a true election law expert.

Attorney Ben Ginsburg, life-long Republican and one of the lawyers that argued in the Supreme Court on behalf of George Bush in Bush v. Gore: "I don't think the Supreme Court, for an instant, will consider taking up this case. I can't imagine something that is less faithful to a principle of state's rights than a Texas attorney general trying to tell other states how to run their elections."

Once the defendants file their brief(s) later this afternoon, the most likely result is that the court will dismiss the case outright. Do not be surprised if there is one or more justices who dissent from the dismissal. But don’t read anything into that. Some justices are on record that all original jurisdiction cases should at least get beyond the dismissal stage.

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating. You are not going to get reliable reporting from TV talking heads or their on-air contributors. The courts have been ruling clearly and consistently.

I can’t say it better than the Arizona judge in one of the “release the Kraken” cases: “Plaintiffs append over three hundred pages of attachments, which are impressive only for their volume.” Sound and fury, signifying nothing. [Written December 10, 2020]