I get how the SCOTUS majority can willfully ignore this, but how can smart people like Al and Peter not see this?

Don’t get me wrong. This is another in a long line of crappy decisions by the current SCOTUS. The most egregious of the errors is taking the appeal in the first place.

This has been Trump's MO going back many years. Appeal every little decision to run up the legal costs for the opposing party. He’s got deep pockets - much deeper than the opposition in most cases. It’s a tactic to drain the opposing party of both resources and the will to continue.

SCOTUS has been reinforcing this habit by agreeing to take up most of his appeals and letting cases drag out much longer than they need to. THAT is their biggest failing here - taking the emergency appeal at all. I’m particularly disappointed in Roberts. Sure, he’s conservative leaning. But unlike a couple of recent appointments, he’s actually qualified for the job.

Staying the injunction seems ridiculous to me. The whole intent of the EO is to tell states how to run elections, which is clearly in the purview of the states and not the President. The only carve out in the constitution is for Congress to pass laws. NOT the President to issue EOs.

So yes, I absolutely see it. I was trying to be more impartial in my previous post. I’m letting loose in this one.

—Peter