• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matthew Best said:
Do they not have to provide grounds for appeal? Or is it OK just to say "we didn't like the result last time, so can we have a different result?"
Click to expand...

Anyone can appeal, and in the notice of appeal they have to say why they're appealing.

I'm not as familiar with procedures at circuit courts (i.e. the appeals court) as I am at the Supreme Court. At the Supreme Court, they look at the appeal, and vote whether or not to hear the case. If they vote no, that's it. They publish a note saying that the Court denied a writ of certiorari, and there is no comment and you don't even know how the various justices voted.

At the appellate court level I'm not sure how it works. I know that you can't just waste the court's time just because you feel like it, but I don't know exactly how the process goes to weed out frivolous requests.
 
https://www.findlaw.com/litigation/filing-a-lawsuit/appealing-a-court-decision-or-judgment.html

...snip...

Most civil and criminal decisions of a state or federal trial court (as well as administrative decisions by agencies) are subject to review by an appeals court. Whether the appeal concerns a judge's order or a jury's verdict, an appeals court reviews what happened in prior proceedings for any errors of law. This means losing parties can't appeal a case just because they're unhappy with the outcome; they may only challenge decisions that may have resulted from errors, such as a misinterpretation of legal precedent or reliance on evidence that should have been excluded.

If you're appealing a court decision or judgment, you'll want to get a handle on how the process works. The following is an overview of court appeals.


...snip...

Appellate Briefs

The main form of persuasion on appeal is the written appellate brief, filed by counsel for each party. With this brief, the party that lost in the trial court will argue that the trial judge incorrectly applied the law. The party that won below will argue that the trial court's decision was correct. Both parties will support their positions with reference to applicable case law and statutes.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Matthew Best said:
So presumably there must be more to the appeal than just this:

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1330605180233150469/photo/1
Click to expand...

Yes. That is just the notice of appeal. That just tells the court and the other party that you are appealing. That's just the first step.

There will also be document called the "Assignment of Errors" that points out why you are appealing. That is sometimes included as part of the notice of appeal. It appears in this case that only the notice has so far been filed.

Then there will be appellant briefs filed by each side arguing why the appeal should be upheld or denied. And then maybe oral arguments.
 
smartcooky said:
Filing an appeal doesn't mean the case will be heard. If the Third Circuit declines to hear it, there is nowhere else to go.
Click to expand...

Federal circuit courts have to hear appeals (provided they a properly filed, the type of case is not exempt from appeal, the court has jurisdiction, etc.) The Supreme Court can choose whether or not to hear a case (unless the court has original jurisdiction and in small number of other special cases where it has to hear a case.)
 
Matthew Best said:
Do they not have to provide grounds for appeal? Or is it OK just to say "we didn't like the result last time, so can we have a different result?"
Click to expand...

I don't think they HAVE to provide grounds for an appeal. They can just say "we don't think they got it right, we are appealing". But it helps a lot if they can spell out why they are appealing.

Saying "WE DECLARE AN APPEAL!" after being burned so hard by the decision is not going to go well.

Granted, I could be totally off about that, I'm not a lawyer and I'm getting different impressions from different lawyer-y people. But the constant take is "this lawsuit is doomed"
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
...One thing we can be certain of is that it's dishonest and disgusting.
Click to expand...

Oh, dishonest and disgusting barely begins to cover it. It's literally the worst thing an American president has ever done to this country, indeed perhaps the worst thing any American has done to it. Usually words like that are hyperbole, intended to demonize what in hindsight will be considered merely garden-variety villainy. But in this case it's probably an understatement. I believe history will look back at this time, baffled and disgusted, and wonder how the hell we Americans could have let this happened. What the hell was wrong with us?
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Filing an appeal doesn't mean the case will be heard. If the Third Circuit declines to hear it, there is nowhere else to go.
Click to expand...

DevilsAdvocate said:
Federal circuit courts have to hear appeals (provided they a properly filed, the type of case is not exempt from appeal, the court has jurisdiction, etc.) The Supreme Court can choose whether or not to hear a case (unless the court has original jurisdiction and in small number of other special cases where it has to hear a case.)
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, though. "Hearing" a case at the appelant level may simply consist of "I have read the briefs. Appeal denied. Go home." Of course, that's the top level summary. The actual ruling would be more like, "Here is what is wrong with everything in your briefs. Go home." (Special not to attorney Giuliani. This is not meant as a request to see more of what's in your briefs.)

In other words, the appeal can be decided solely on the contents of the briefs, without ever scheduling an actual hearing or oral arguments.
 
Firestone said:
Sidney Powell is to insane for the Trump campaign.

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1330639253240508418/photo/1


I wonder if the breaking point was Powell suggesting that the Senate race in Georgia was rigged, and that Collins rather than Loeffler should be in the run off.
Click to expand...

Well, suggesting that the Georgia Governor and Secretary of State -- both Republicans, mind you -- took bribes to rig the election for Biden certainly couldn't have helped. Guess she won't get to "blow up" the state with her "biblical" lawsuit after all.

ETA: Actually, the more I think about it, the sadder I am that I won't get to witness Ms. Powell's lawsuit. Imagine the spectacle of the sitting GOP Governor of the State of Georgia testifying as a defendant, being accused by the White House of committing felonies to rig the election for a Democrat -- insane! Never mind the all-but-inevitable defamation countersuit the Governor would file against the WH. Even for the crazy charade that is the WH legal team, this must have been too demented to tolerate.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, though. "Hearing" a case at the appelant level may simply consist of "I have read the briefs. Appeal denied. Go home." Of course, that's the top level summary. The actual ruling would be more like, "Here is what is wrong with everything in your briefs. Go home." (Special not to attorney Giuliani. This is not meant as a request to see more of what's in your briefs.)

In other words, the appeal can be decided solely on the contents of the briefs, without ever scheduling an actual hearing or oral arguments.
Click to expand...

Correct. Oral arguments are not required. The court may or may not allow oral arguments and parties made choose whether to not to give oral arguments. Oral arguments are basically just a way for the court to ask questions into order make sure it clearly understands the arguments made in the briefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom