He didn’t have a vehicle for it in 2020.

what the fuck are you talking about.

What’s the case that would have overturned the result? Roberts will do it as long as there’s any procedural fig leaf.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v...

A case which wouldn’t have changed the outcome.

The case concerned four states, not just one. If Scotus had determined that all should be exempted from the election, I think that would have swung it to Trump, or to the House (and therefore to Trump).

It’s not about the number of states. It’s that there was absolutely no fig leaf there. Even if you accept their argument about changing the rules, the proper remedy would be to discard the illegally cast ballots. Can’t really do that if you wait until a month after the election to even file suit 1/2

It’s sounds trivial, but the biggest hallmark of Roberts jurisprudence is “don’t make me have to openly look like an idiot.” It’s why he sided with the libs in June Medical even though he took the opposite in Hellerstedt and why he made a last minute flip in Dept. of Commerce v New York. 2/2

Why exactly doesn't Roberts look like an idiot after (hypothetically) ruling that the 22nd Amendment has basically no meaning whatsoever? Thus far he's cosigned remotely like that in terms of contradicting the letter of the law (he's merely eviscerating the spirit).

He’s already done that for Section 3 of the 14th Amendment in Trump v Anderson. I don’t see why he wouldn’t apply the exact same reasoning in this case.

It's been a real long few years since June Medical. Roberts has mostly given up fig leaf pretentions now that he can't swing the vote.

bsky.app/profile/theo...