1. You are wrong. Go to the link. The Trump lawsuit dropped the original Counts I & II of the complaint, the ones alleging violations of law arising from denial of observation of the vote. It deleted paragraph ii of the prayer for relief. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.125.1.pdf … https://twitter.com/PereGrimmer/status/1328360849522765824 …
-
-
5. This is, in fact, precisely why courts ask plaintiffs to submit this kind of markup of a revised complaint, so the court and the defendant can see exactly what changed in the lawsuit when a complaint was revised.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Couldn't a more charitable reading be, that the poll watcher issue is now lumped in with the request to deny certification on the state as a whole? (even though that request was there previously)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sadly, that distinction somehow gets lost in many civil cases even for the courts. But you're 100% correct, in that generally plaintiffs can only receive the relief that they seek in the prayer. And it's notable that the plaintiff in this case dropped that relief request.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You're arguing with a toaster, what do you expect
-
Between a toaster and Trump's claims, I'd bet on the toaster.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.