>>18884182 (LB)
>I hear your points and they make sense to my laymanfag (dare I say) ear, However, the law of elections being derived from the constitution
>seem to imply a federal role.
>Also, Kari saying she thinks the SCOTUS is primed and ready for a case like hers or some such type werds leads me to think she has a clue.
>My point mainly is that Kari will win Imao but it will drag on a while, which will possibly work in our favor come Nov 2024.
Governors are basically presidents of the state.
There is a 10th amendment issue here, as electing a governor is a state issue.
That being said, in order for this case to rise to the level of a SCOTUS issue, there has to be federal issues at stake. As of yet, there has been no apparent violation of federal election laws.
I do not have access to all of the information that Lake's team has. But as of what is available to the public, her appeal, if any, would have to go before the Arizona Supreme court.