The Supreme Court, Trump, Biden and the Election Explained

first_imgJustices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh said they would have granted a stay blocking the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision. On the other side were Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court’s three-member liberal wing: Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who joined the court on Oct. 27, did not take part in the decision not to fast-track the case. A court spokeswoman said Justice Barrett had not participated “because of the need for a prompt resolution” and “because she has not had time to fully review the parties’ filings.” Pennsylvania officials have instructed county election officials to segregate ballots arriving after 8 p.m. on Election Day through 5 p.m. three days later. That would as a practical matter allow a ruling from the Supreme Court to determine whether they were ultimately counted.Justice Alito’s statement in the Pennsylvania case echoed an earlier concurring opinion by Justice Kavanaugh in a voting case from Wisconsin. Justice Kavanaugh also said that state legislatures, rather than state courts, have the last word in setting state election procedures.Taken together, the Oct. 17 deadlock and statements from four justices suggest that Justice Barrett could cast the decisive vote if the Pennsylvania dispute holds the key to the election. Updated Nov. 4, 2020, 12:06 p.m. ET Late last month, the justices refused a plea from Republicans in the state to fast-track a decision on whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had acted lawfully.- Advertisement – The U.S. Supreme Court has not hesitated to block orders from federal judges that sought to alter state rules for conducting elections. Rulings from state courts present more difficult questions because the Supreme Court generally defers to them in cases concerning interpretations of state law, while the Constitution empowers state legislatures to set the times, places and manner of congressional elections.In a statement issued when the court refused to speed the Pennsylvania case, Justice Alito, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, criticized his court’s treatment of the matter, which he said had “needlessly created conditions that could lead to serious postelection problems.”“The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has issued a decree that squarely alters an important statutory provision enacted by the Pennsylvania legislature pursuant to its authority under the Constitution of the United States to make rules governing the conduct of elections for federal office,” he wrote, adding that he regretted that the election would be “conducted under a cloud.”“It would be highly desirable to issue a ruling on the constitutionality of the State Supreme Court’s decision before the election,” Justice Alito wrote. “That question has national importance, and there is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the federal Constitution.”But there was not enough time, he wrote. Still, Justice Alito left little doubt about where he stood on the question in the case. The court’s refusal to move more quickly came a little more than a week after it deadlocked, 4 to 4, on an emergency application in the case on Oct. 19. – Advertisement –center_img Should the vote in Pennsylvania have the potential to determine the outcome in the Electoral College and should those late-arriving ballots have the potential to swing the state — two big ifs — the U.S. Supreme Court might well intercede.The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ordered a three-day extension for ballots clearly mailed on or before Election Day and for those with missing or illegible postmarks “unless a preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that it was mailed after Election Day.” WASHINGTON — President Trump promised early Wednesday morning to ask the Supreme Court to intervene in the election. “We’ll be going to the U.S. Supreme Court,” he said. “We want all voting to stop.”The first statement was premature. The second did not make sense.- Advertisement – The Supreme Court decides actual disputes, not abstract propositions, and then only after lower courts have made their own rulings. While there have been countless election cases filed around the nation, it is not clear which of them might reach the court in the coming days.But one candidate is already on the court’s docket. Last month, the court refused to put a case from Pennsylvania on a fast track, but three justices indicated that the court might return to it later if need be.As far as voting is concerned, it stopped on Election Day. But some states allow votes cast by mail on or before Election Day to be counted if they are received up to several days afterward. In Pennsylvania, for instance, the state Supreme Court extended the deadline for receiving ballots from Election Day to three days later. “The provisions of the federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures, not state courts, the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless,” he wrote, “if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature simply by claiming that a state constitutional provision gave the courts the authority to make whatever rules it thought appropriate for the conduct of a fair election.” – Advertisement –last_img read more

Pochettino hits out at ‘irresponsible’ football chiefs over pandemic

first_img “I understand that the economic aspect comes into play in football and is a deciding factor much of the time, but seeing everything that is happening, I think that in Europe, they managed irresponsibly and made late decisions.” Pochettino led Spurs to the Champions League Final last season before being replaced by Jose Mourinho in November. But he revealed he told his former players to do all they can to look after themselves and their families. “I told them that there is no need to be at risk and that football takes second place to health,” Pochettino told Radio Del Plata. “It seems good to me that measures have already been taken. It is the best way to try to control the virus until a cure is found.” On Thursday the Premier League announced that there would be no resumption of top-flight football in England until April 30 at the earliest, extending their previous date of April 4. Read Also:Pochettino wants Messi union at Newell’s Old Boys It was also agreed that the season would be extended indefinitely to ensure that the 2019/20 season was allowed to be played until a finish. FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 Loading… The ex-Spurs boss, who lives in Barcelona, has also revealed he has been in touch with his former players urging them to put themselves first and football second. The Premier League announced a suspension of games after Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta contracted the virus a week ago. UEFA followed suit after a video conference call earlier this week. Pochettino Europe’s leaders should have acted far more swiftly to take protective measures. “They handled themselves irresponsibly and made late decisions,” he said. Troy Deeney desperate to finish Premier League season to ensure a “fair outcome”Advertisement Mauricio Pochettino has hit out at European football’s “irresponsible” leaders for being too slow to react to the coronavirus crisis. Promoted ContentCan Playing Too Many Video Games Hurt Your Body?Best & Worst Celebrity Endorsed Games Ever Made10 Risky Jobs Some Women DoTop 10 Most Romantic Nations In The WorldPlaying Games For Hours Can Do This To Your Body8 Things To Expect If An Asteroid Hits Our PlanetMacaulay Culkin’s Own Version Of The New ‘Home Alone’What Is A Black Hole In Simple Terms?What Happens To Your Brain When You Play Too Much Video Games?Is This The Most Delicious Food In The World?6 Unforgettable Shows From The 90s That Need To Make A Comeback6 Ridiculous Health Myths That Are Actually Truelast_img read more

BH National Football Team defeated in Cyprus after a shocking Turnaround

first_imgThe national football team of BiH was defeated in Nicosia in the 7th round of qualifiers for the World Cup 2018 against the selection of Cyprus, with the score 2: 3 after a shocking turnaround.Lulic hit the goal stand already in the third minute of the match, and five minutes later, Pjanic performed a free kick, after which Sotiriou cleared the danger in front of the goal of Cyprus.Our selection performed a counterattack in the 20th minute. Visca played a return ball for Ibisevic, who missed the chance.Our team then attacked through Dzeko and Ibisevic, but the defense of Cyprus headed by goalkeeper Panayi responded quickly.Players of Cyprus also had a great chance when Laban shot the ball next to the goal, after which a penalty followed.Sunjic scored after the hat-trick and a well-performed corner.Ten minutes later, our national team doubled their advantage. Kolasinac came from the left side and passed the ball to Visca, who scored for 2: 0. It seemed that the Dragons will routinely end the match.Our team was unrecognizable in the second half, and Cyprus dominated in the field, and they soon crowned this with goals.Particularly dangerous was Christofi, who reduced our advantage to 2: 1 in the 65th minute of the match.Two minutes later followed a total shock. Our team members were punished by Laban’s great shot, which led to the score 2:2.This was not the end for Mehmed Bazdarevic and his team. In the 76th minute, the team of Cyprus scored their third goal, and the scorer was Sotiriou.There was no change in the result until the end of the match, so our selection experienced an incredible defeat, which decreased its chances for the placement on the World Cup.(Source: N. K./Klix.ba)last_img read more