The problem here is that Trump lost on a motion to dismiss, not on the merits.
So what goes up on appeal is whether the case should have been dismissed.
If the Third Circuit also rules FOR Trump the ruling is that the lower court was incorrect in dismissing the case . . .
1/
So what goes up on appeal is whether the case should have been dismissed.
If the Third Circuit also rules FOR Trump the ruling is that the lower court was incorrect in dismissing the case . . .
1/
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1330342230175911938
. . . which means the case goes back to the lower court for a hearing.
If the Third Circuit rules AGAINST Trump, and the case goes to the Supreme Court, the issue is whether the case should have been dismissed.
If SCOTUS rules FOR Trump. . .
If the Third Circuit rules AGAINST Trump, and the case goes to the Supreme Court, the issue is whether the case should have been dismissed.
If SCOTUS rules FOR Trump. . .
. . . it means the lower court must grant a trial.
So Trump gets a hearing. Even if things go very quickly, this will take weeks. At the end, if Trump wins, he gets a hearing, which also takes time.
So Trump's email was malarkey.
So Trump gets a hearing. Even if things go very quickly, this will take weeks. At the end, if Trump wins, he gets a hearing, which also takes time.
So Trump's email was malarkey.
This won't work. The only thing that can prevent a state from certifying the election is a court order preventing them from certifying.
In other words, the court must issue an order stopping the certification.
In other words, the court must issue an order stopping the certification.
https://twitter.com/Serenity_Sleeps/status/1330375926740299776
The other problem for Trump is that the court ruled against them on several grounds: Standing, no cause of action, etc. etc. In other words, the judge gave multiple (good) reasons for dismissing the case.
To "win" Team Trump has to overcome each reason . . .
To "win" Team Trump has to overcome each reason . . .
. . . they have to argue that they have standing (they don't) that they had a valid cause of action (they didn't) etc. etc.
One thing people don't understand about appeals is that you don't get a new trial on appeal. In fact, you don't get a trial on appeal . . .
One thing people don't understand about appeals is that you don't get a new trial on appeal. In fact, you don't get a trial on appeal . . .
The appellate court looks at what the lower court did to see if they applied the correct law.
The district court found the case so weak they wouldn't even allow an amended complaint.
The district court found the case so weak they wouldn't even allow an amended complaint.
They have to persuade the appellate court that the lower court shouldn't have dismissed the case.
The appellate court will look at the record from the lower court: docs filed, transcripts of hearings. They'll hear arguments on whether the judge erred.
The appellate court will look at the record from the lower court: docs filed, transcripts of hearings. They'll hear arguments on whether the judge erred.
https://twitter.com/Dame_Mechanus/status/1330382569611943936
The issue will be: Should the lower court have allowed the case to proceed, or was the lower court correct in throwing the whole thing out and refusing to allow an amended complaint.
The lawyers point to the record and argue about whether the court's ruling was justified.
The lawyers point to the record and argue about whether the court's ruling was justified.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
