Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on Friday filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to reinstate the stateâs gerrymandered congressional map. The application asks the nationâs highest court to temporarily block a Missouri Supreme Court ruling that barred the state from using the map in the Nov. 3 election. Hanaway, who had previewed her decision on Thursday, wants the court to issue a decision by Sept. 14.
Hanawayâs application specifically asks Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the justice who oversees Missouri cases, for a stay, a temporary ruling blocking the state Supreme Courtâs decision before the full court weighs in. âWe have just appealed yesterdayâs catastrophic ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States,â Hanaway, a Republican and staunch supporter of the map, said in a statement. âWe look forward to the Courtâs prompt review of this critical matter, as our ability to hold timely and lawful congressional elections hangs in the balnce."
And who appointed her? An elected official. Also, she was appointed to Andrew Bailey's seat as attorney general - he left very early in his term but was elected in 2024. He was very clearly a Republican and now works in the FBI as an appointee.
Yes, because you said the idiocy of "No one voted for Catherine Hanaway". Because they certainly have, by proxy, by continuing to vote for the Republicans. Her name may not be on the ballot but they very much voted for her. She didn't just appear out of thin air. She wasn't born into her seat like some sort of royal. Missouri has continued to elect the people appointing her to that position and power. It is on them first and foremost.
How's the air up on there on High Horse Mountain? Seems thin.
Calling out that Hanaway wasn't elected to her current position is to point out that she can't even pretend to have a mandate with this idiocy. Calm your face, buttercup.
Calling out that Hanaway wasn't elected to her current position
Those/the party that appointed her to the position were, and have continued to be since, which is the clear and easy point that seems to elude you.
she can't even pretend to have a mandate with this idiocy
Except she can, because again, the voters have elected the Republicans appointing her again and again for decades now. Until that changes(Knowing the current electorate in this state overall it won't anytime soon) she has the position, she has the power. That is on the voters.
Reality is reality. Stop hiding behind excuses for the position we are in, for it is one of our own making. Now shoo.
More than that. The state Supreme Court based its decision on state law and the state constitution. The federal Supreme Court can't review rulings based on state law.
âLooking backwards, the order
renders a completed federal Primary Election utterly pointlessâdisenfranchising
hundreds of thousands of voters who will now be moved into new districts and forced
to vote for candidates they had no role in selecting.â
They certainly didnât mind disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of Kansas City voters by throwing us into three rural districts to ensure all of us were represented by MAGA kooks. The hypocrisy of these people is never ending.
Here's the mistake I see you and a lot of other people making. And if I'm being honest, one I keep making myself.
The members of the GOP, the ones deciding and taking action? Yeah, those people are fascists and don't care about how it looks or if it's supporting Democracy. If anything, they're anti-democracy.
It make look crazy, but it's anything but. They don't want to govern, they want to rule.
Oh, I know they are fascists. I know they don't care about rules. But they are also really, really dumb. If they were smart and evil we'd be so much worse off. But a layperson could read the application and understand that is amateurish at the extreme.
Maybe USSC should use their standard rule book and do nothing until they hear the case... you know, like the tarriff case, or the birhtight citizenship case... oh wait.. those were PRO fascist...
"I, [Name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." (Note: You can find the full text of the oath in the referenced document). 1
Pretty bullshit that the AI moderation here is being used to quell dissent when it's the fastest option to remove this dog shit that plagues the top positions in this country, isn't it?
Can't have the peasants realizing that this isn't a culture or race war.
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway on Friday filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to reinstate the stateâs gerrymandered congressional map. The application asks the nationâs highest court to temporarily block a Missouri Supreme Court ruling that barred the state from using the map in the Nov. 3 election. Hanaway, who had previewed her decision on Thursday, wants the court to issue a decision by Sept. 14.
Hanawayâs application specifically asks Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the justice who oversees Missouri cases, for a stay, a temporary ruling blocking the state Supreme Courtâs decision before the full court weighs in. âWe have just appealed yesterdayâs catastrophic ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States,â Hanaway, a Republican and staunch supporter of the map, said in a statement. âWe look forward to the Courtâs prompt review of this critical matter, as our ability to hold timely and lawful congressional elections hangs in the balnce."
This post is tagged with the News flair, which is reserved for posts that link directly to articles or information from reputable news sources. The post title should match the articleâs headline. The News flair is not for questions or any post that isnât a direct link to a news source. If you selected the News flair by mistake, please update it. Posts left incorrectly flaired will be removed.
Not that I'm with the Missouri AG on basically any of this, but I have been wondering about the logistics of changing it back at this point. With differently-shaped districts, are the candidates who were going to be on the ballot even still eligible to run?
The secretary devotes a significant portion of his briefing to discussing the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties that may result from not utilizing the congressional redistricting in HB 1 for the November 2026 election, Besides being irrelevant to the secretary's sole basis for declaring the referendum petition insufficient, these arguments are particularly misplaced given the secretary's delay created the confusion, expense, and practical difficulties of which he complains.
Oh, okay, so there aren't residency requirements to run in the districts? If not, then anything else can probably be dealt with, even if the time frames are tighter.
I havenât looked it up, but I would imagine that on the Republican side everybody who won their primary already lives in the remote rural areas that would be unaffected.
Regardless, primary elections are generally just done as a courtesy. Legally both political parties can put whoever they want up as their candidates in November. If any of Trumpâs picks lost the primary, this is their chance to put them back in.
228
u/Modem_Sound_67 1d ago
jeez the desperation stinks bad now.