Public Discussion on the Supreme Court Cases (Avoid Cluttering Case Threads)

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I, along with (I'd assume) many other Atlasians (including several in the Labor & Whig parties), are publicly voicing their concern and whatnot about Tweed's lawsuit (which I am very concerned about publicly), while privately hoping Tweed triumphs (as Simfan put it) 'for the lulz'.

This is likely what we're all thinking.

It would spell civil war. And I wouldn't be able to stop laughing.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm fairly certain that the new president would have to actually act unconstitutionally for a case like this to be entertained.  The mere election of one whom you don't trust will act within the bounds of the Constitution is not, in itself, illegal.

That's part of the argument in my amicus brief. I'm waiting to post it until the Whig Party finishes voting on whether or not to endorse. Simfan seemingly doesn't have quite the sense of urgency or drama that I do (not necessarily a bad thing, don't get me wrong) and he called for a twenty-four-hour vote throughout this calendar day.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I have submitted the joint amicus brief of several major political parties and Atlasian statesmen in the Tweed case.