It wouldn't have nullified shit. It would have been a way to expose the fraud in a Court of law.
Courts do not play Galahad and leap defense. The are cowards who make decisions within the mainstream. Remember that.
"Although its record is by no means lacking in serious blemishes, at its best the Court operates to confer legitimacy, not simply on the particular and parochial policies of the dominant political alliance, but upon the basic patterns of behavior
required for the operation of a democracy."
Robert A. Dahl's 1957, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Role of the Supreme Court in National Policy-Making.
....because it is easier to prove that election laws were violated, and done in a unconstitutional way, and that you need audits to prove fraud. And if you have a case actually accepted, you can use that as a vehicle to talk about fraud.
[edit: the Texas case that like half the states signed onto did deal with fraud]
It wouldn't have nullified shit. It would have been a way to expose the fraud in a Court of law.
Courts do not play Galahad and leap defense. The are cowards who make decisions within the mainstream. Remember that.
"Although its record is by no means lacking in serious blemishes, at its best the Court operates to confer legitimacy, not simply on the particular and parochial policies of the dominant political alliance, but upon the basic patterns of behavior required for the operation of a democracy."
Robert A. Dahl's 1957, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Role of the Supreme Court in National Policy-Making.
http://epstein.wustl.edu/research/DahlDecisionMaking.pdf
when did Trump's lawyers ever argue fraud fraud in any of their cases?
Were they ever given the option?
sure, they could have filed an appropriate case that argued fraud.
any idea why they never did that?
....because it is easier to prove that election laws were violated, and done in a unconstitutional way, and that you need audits to prove fraud. And if you have a case actually accepted, you can use that as a vehicle to talk about fraud.
[edit: the Texas case that like half the states signed onto did deal with fraud]
You, sir, are a shitty Socrates.