Given the recent revelations about the cozy, copacetic relationship between CNN and the Democrat party, it must have pained the cable news channel to have to run a headline reporting a major victory for Donald Trump just hours before Americans head to the polls.

The win came courtesy of the U.S. Supreme Court, as it refused to reinstate a restraining order issued by a lower court in Ohio prohibiting Republicans from “watching” for irregularities at polling places.

Democrats had launched lawsuits around the nation claiming that Republican candidate, Donald Trump, was “conspiring to threaten and intimidate minority voters in urban neighborhoods from voting in the 2016 election.”

In one case, U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond had called the Democrats’ last minute filings a “mad scramble” finding their “heated suggestion” of voter intimidation didn’t even rise to the level of “speculation.”

In a brief before the Supreme Court, Marc Elias, a lawyer for the Democrats, argued that Trump’s assertion that the election would be “stolen” from him unless his supporters were on hand at polling places amounted to voter suppression, but the high court didn’t buy the argument.

Although the exact vote will not be disclosed, as the Court declined to hear arguments, allowing the lower court order to stand, even Trump critic, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal, voted against hearing the Democrats’ request.

Writing separately, Ginsburg noted that voter intimidation is already prohibited by Ohio statutes, making a special restraining order unnecessary and duplicative.

Chad A. Readler, a lawyer for the Trump campaign, attacked the lower court’s ruling, saying, “Intimidating voters is illegal, and the campaign does not remotely condone such conduct.”

Apparently, even the liberals on the Supreme Court agreed.

 

 

 

Send this to friend