Nonlegal factors that SCOTUS justices might have to consider in deliberating Texas’s lawsuit

Nonlegal factors that SCOTUS justices might have to consider in deliberating Texas’s lawsuit. By Thomas Lifson.

The first contextual factor that must be weighing on the minds of the nine justices is expressed in a question asked by Clarice Feldman: “Do you think the Democrats regret talking about packing the Supreme Court?”

I don’t see how the justices can avoid being influenced by the prospect that should the vote count certified in Georgia early next month send Rev. Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff to the Senate, court-packing will be on the table should Joseph Biden be named president. Purely from the point of view of personal power and influence, it is better to be one of nine than one of thirteen, fifteen, or seventeen. Moreover, the institutional standing of the Supreme Court would inevitably be diminished by court-packing.  …

Then there is the matter of civil unrest.  On the one hand, the anger that might accompany a negative decision that hands the presidency to Biden in the face of obvious fraud surely weighs against handing victory to Texas.  But on the other hand, the justices must ponder the reaction of the other side, the supporters of Trump and of fully exposing such fraud as took place.  Antifa and BLM have demonstrated their willingness to burn down large swaths of cities.  So far, the so-called deplorables have not yet been moved to violence, but they are reputed to be well armed, and, if they are convinced that the political and judicial systems of the United States have cheated them, there is no telling how far their revulsion will take them.

hat-tip Kat H.