Brice

@GGZ_71 @lydiabackagain @WhickTv That’s a strange admission that it benefits republicans if people who are illegally voting suddenly are not longer able to do it anymore 🤔

@bricef99 @lydiabackagain @WhickTv Limiting the number of people that can vote and rigging the system to benefit republicans.

Look, I hear you. I don't like gerrymandering either. Republicans control the senate, the house, have the presidency, and are 6-3 on SCOTUS. They could ban gerrymandering. They could've stopped this and all other gerrymanders If they wanted to. Ask yourself: "Why don't they?"

@skscartoon Yeah, the reason is red states tend to be spineless cowards

Is there a reason why can't EVERY SINGLE red state does the same???

@InnerFr4tB0y @LeadingReport It is more “forgivable” but surely there has to be a better way of getting past the months if stalling to get a final verdict from the Supreme Court, or at the very least this shouldn’t be codified until it is heard by the Supreme Court imo.

@bricef99 @LeadingReport In this case however its a state court telling a state governor whats not constitutional. This in my opinion is more forgivable than a state judge dictating what the president can do foreign policy wise. See the difference?

JUST IN: Virginia Circuit Judge blocks new Congressional map after election.

@GGZ_71 @lydiabackagain @WhickTv What’s the save act about?

@bricef99 @lydiabackagain @WhickTv As soon as you admit that support for the save act cannot be conflated with this poll.

@brianander81 @LeadingReport Actually that sounds lovely since I’m a conservative

@bricef99 @LeadingReport I guess you really won’t be happy when SCOTUS flips 12 seats from blue to red in the south when it throws out racially based maps. Look it up.

@seanldunn @TwinkieGlidden @LeadingReport Which drags the process out for months until it gets appealed all the away to the Supreme Court where it is ultimately decided anyways. Why not just skip to that part?

@bricef99 @TwinkieGlidden @LeadingReport I mean, it's possible, albeit unlikely, that the defendants will let the ruling stand. But as it works it's way through the courts, each judge adds their opinion, and the lawyers get to add their arguments, at least until it can no longer be escalated.

@ST0LENWifi @LeadingReport I never liked them lol circuit judges blocking the president from military and immigration orders was and still is disguising

@bricef99 @LeadingReport oh now you dont like when the lower courts get involved... you cant pick and choose

This is day 112 of asking @LeaderJohnThune to pass the SAVE America Act.

@Airaxora Wait you guys are getting likes?

would y’all keep tweeting with 0 likes?

@TomSteyer Shouldn’t we be bringing anyone who breaks the law to justice? Or just ICE agents who are executing the lawful orders of immigration law?

As governor, I will defend California’s rights to protect our residents from authoritarian thugs. Let me be clear: If ICE agents and their leaders break the law, we will bring them to justice. It’s time to fight fire with fire.

@InnerFr4tB0y @LeadingReport That’s precisely my point, it SHOULDN’T

@bricef99 @LeadingReport Hey if a random lower court can stop the president at every turn what's wrong here?

@MachiaGOD @LeadingReport What if the vote of the people in one state allows slavery to be legal again?

@bricef99 @LeadingReport No court should ever override the vote of the people.

@SognoAmico @TwinkieGlidden @LeadingReport Right, which is why it’s really hard to implement and I get that. I just think it’s ridiculous this is the system we have to put up with.

@bricef99 @TwinkieGlidden @LeadingReport Like scotus doesn’t have enough to hear, without every other case going straight to the Supreme Court. That would be ridiculous. But your sentiment is correct.

@jedgar102 @LeadingReport That’s my whole point is they shouldn’t lol

@bricef99 @LeadingReport But circuit judges should block the orange man

@lydiabackagain @GGZ_71 @WhickTv That’s not my argument. I’m simply explaining how the system currently is. If you want to concede that you were wrong about your convictions and move on to talking about why we do or do not need the save act then we can do that.

@bricef99 @GGZ_71 @WhickTv Ok where is the proven voter fraud in those states?

@lydiabackagain @GGZ_71 @WhickTv Me when I move the goal posts

@bricef99 @GGZ_71 @WhickTv SAVE Act failed. That is a fact. It failed because it was unpopular. It will never become law. Even 1 legitemate vote thrown out as a result of searching for an instance of voter fraud is too many.

@HailingHogs @LeadingReport Right, I am aware of how the process works. I just think there has to be a more efficient way to decide these things instead of dragging it out for months at a time.

@bricef99 @LeadingReport They can’t fast track to the Supreme Court until there’s a judgment recorded. State cases can’t start in the Supreme Court. That’s why this happened.

@CheryMy @LeadingReport No I agree with you, I just think big cases like this should be fast tracked honestly. It would prevent all the BS circuit court judge injunctions and stalling out the system for months.

@bricef99 @LeadingReport Not how that works even gun rights cases have to have a lower court ruling b4 going to Supreme Court. Sometimes it needs multiple rulings if courts are ruling differently

@TwinkieGlidden @LeadingReport I know that how the process goes, I am saying I think we should change the process to skip over district court judges to stop all this BS injunctions.

@bricef99 @LeadingReport How do you think things get to the supreme court, dude?