I'm not seeing critics of #SCOTUS ruling on Wisconsin election present, much less engage, reasoning of majority. Here's the ruling. Majority runs 4 pages. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/19a1016_o759.pdf 1/

#SCOTUS majority: Plaintiffs did not ask district court to allow ballots mailed and postmarked after election day to be counted. District ct ordered that on its own, just 5 days before election day. Changing the election rules so close to election day violates our precedent. 2/

Under district court-order , those casting absentee ballots after election day would have benefit of knowing what happened at polls on election day. To avoid this, district court issued 2nd order enjoining public release of election results for six days after election day. 3/

#SCOTUS: District court in essence enjoined non-parties to the lawsuit. Also highly questionable that this attempt to suppress disclosure of the election results for six days after election day would work. 4/

Seems to me that if the political polarities were flipped--i.e., a close-to-election-day order by a district court fundamentally changing the rules in favor of Republican plaintiffs--the ruling to reverse would be 9-0. Is there evidence to the contrary? 5/

Clarification on 2: Plaintiffs did not request *in their written motions* what the district court ordered. RBG states in her dissent that they did orally request it at the hearing. 6/

I'm not disputing that there is a messy situation in Wisconsin. Issue is proper judicial role in addressing that mess. Established principle against lower courts making late changes to election rules reasonably governs. 7/

#SCOTUS majority: "Wisconsin has decided to proceed with the elections scheduled for Tuesday, April 7. The wisdom of that decision is not the question before the Court." 8/