It is not an "assault on democracy" to take your case to court. It is the opposite.
-
-
Replying to @davidharsanyi
Doesn't that depend on the content of the case?
9 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @jadler1969
Not really. We have to assume bad cases will be thrown out. I'm not sure how that's an attack on democracy. Ignoring the court is a different story.
4 replies 1 retweet 35 likes -
Replying to @davidharsanyi @jadler1969
In fact, having the court look at these cases is a far better way to uphold democracy than simply making wild claims without presenting any evidence in court.
5 replies 0 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @davidharsanyi
So you can't imagine legal claims that could be brought that would be an attack on democracy? And doesn't it matter whether the claims are brought in good faith? (Haven't said anything about "these cases" yet. Just trying to establish parameters on which they should be judged).
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jadler1969
No. Can you give me an example? Yes, it matters. But I'm happy to have bad-faith lawsuits chucked. How many times have religious liberty suits, for example, been labeled bad-faith? That's a political debate, not a legal one.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @davidharsanyi
How about a suit seeking to disqualify the winning candidate on a patently absurd theory about the candidate's lack of qualifications or moral fitness? As for the latter, whether bad faith suits count is separate question from how they are identified. 1/2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jadler1969 @davidharsanyi
It's a good thing to have courts reject bad claims. It's even better for bad claims not to be brought and for serious people not to indulge or encourage them. I think that principle is sound. Whether these suits qualify is second-order question. 2/2
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jadler1969 @davidharsanyi
Let me add that lawyers, as officers of the court, have an obligation not to bring frivolous claims. Were these not election suits (and thus so political) we'd be seeing sanctions in many of these cases.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @jadler1969 @davidharsanyi
You have an academic’s view on the likelihood of Rule 11 sanctions in a case. I’ve had courts refuse to sanction literal forgeries of case citations.
4 replies 0 retweets 14 likes
Yeah, sanctions are extraordinarily rare. I once had opposing counsel file a 110 page opposition brief (on a routine state court pleading motion) in which literally every single case they cited had been overruled by the Supreme Court,
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.