Dr. Jerome Corsi - #SCOTUS Changes #Election Law Forever - on now at my #InternetRadio Website, Radio America USA / Philly and Jersey #Radio - Click Dr. Corsi's Image to open a new browser for the show https://radioamericausa.com Dr. Jerome Corsi breaks down a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that could fundamentally change how election integrity cases are handled nationwide.
Dr. Corsi analyzes the 7–2 ruling in Bost v. #Illinois State Board of Elections, in which the Supreme Court affirmed that candidates for federal office have standing to challenge unlawful election procedures before an election is decided. This ruling directly reverses years of lower-court precedent that blocked election challenges by claiming no one had legal standing.
At the center of the case is the issue of mail-in ballots counted after Election Day, a practice Dr. Corsi argues creates systemic vulnerabilities that undermine public trust. The Court ruled that candidates are harmed not only by losing elections, but by unfair electoral processes themselves, affirming that fair procedures are essential to #constitutional governance.
Key Issues Examined
Why the Supreme Court’s ruling is a major turning point
How candidates can now challenge election rules before outcomes are finalized
The constitutional importance of Election Day finality
Why “lack of standing” blocked election challenges after 2020
How unfair rules damage candidates even if outcomes don’t change
The legal implications for mail-in ballot extensions nationwide
What this ruling means for future election litigation
Dr. Corsi explains why this decision opens the door to widespread legal challenges of election procedures that depart from federal law—and why it may finally allow courts to hear evidence that was previously dismissed without review.
CN 1 15 (1)
The episode concludes with a broader warning about institutional trust, constitutional order, and why restoring transparent, lawful elections is essential to preserving the republic.
Dr. Corsi analyzes the 7–2 ruling in Bost v. #Illinois State Board of Elections, in which the Supreme Court affirmed that candidates for federal office have standing to challenge unlawful election procedures before an election is decided. This ruling directly reverses years of lower-court precedent that blocked election challenges by claiming no one had legal standing.
At the center of the case is the issue of mail-in ballots counted after Election Day, a practice Dr. Corsi argues creates systemic vulnerabilities that undermine public trust. The Court ruled that candidates are harmed not only by losing elections, but by unfair electoral processes themselves, affirming that fair procedures are essential to #constitutional governance.
Key Issues Examined
Why the Supreme Court’s ruling is a major turning point
How candidates can now challenge election rules before outcomes are finalized
The constitutional importance of Election Day finality
Why “lack of standing” blocked election challenges after 2020
How unfair rules damage candidates even if outcomes don’t change
The legal implications for mail-in ballot extensions nationwide
What this ruling means for future election litigation
Dr. Corsi explains why this decision opens the door to widespread legal challenges of election procedures that depart from federal law—and why it may finally allow courts to hear evidence that was previously dismissed without review.
CN 1 15 (1)
The episode concludes with a broader warning about institutional trust, constitutional order, and why restoring transparent, lawful elections is essential to preserving the republic.
Dr. Jerome Corsi - #SCOTUS Changes #Election Law Forever - on now at my #InternetRadio Website, Radio America USA / Philly and Jersey #Radio - Click Dr. Corsi's Image to open a new browser for the show https://radioamericausa.com Dr. Jerome Corsi breaks down a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that could fundamentally change how election integrity cases are handled nationwide.
Dr. Corsi analyzes the 7–2 ruling in Bost v. #Illinois State Board of Elections, in which the Supreme Court affirmed that candidates for federal office have standing to challenge unlawful election procedures before an election is decided. This ruling directly reverses years of lower-court precedent that blocked election challenges by claiming no one had legal standing.
At the center of the case is the issue of mail-in ballots counted after Election Day, a practice Dr. Corsi argues creates systemic vulnerabilities that undermine public trust. The Court ruled that candidates are harmed not only by losing elections, but by unfair electoral processes themselves, affirming that fair procedures are essential to #constitutional governance.
🔍 Key Issues Examined
Why the Supreme Court’s ruling is a major turning point
How candidates can now challenge election rules before outcomes are finalized
The constitutional importance of Election Day finality
Why “lack of standing” blocked election challenges after 2020
How unfair rules damage candidates even if outcomes don’t change
The legal implications for mail-in ballot extensions nationwide
What this ruling means for future election litigation
Dr. Corsi explains why this decision opens the door to widespread legal challenges of election procedures that depart from federal law—and why it may finally allow courts to hear evidence that was previously dismissed without review.
CN 1 15 (1)
The episode concludes with a broader warning about institutional trust, constitutional order, and why restoring transparent, lawful elections is essential to preserving the republic.
0 Comments
0 Shares
67 Views
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Portuguese (Brazil)
Greek