There’s a lot more to these recent Surpreme Cases than what you see on the surface. But, consider this. If you agreed to play a game with a certain set of rules, then as you’re mid-game another player decided to change the rules in a way that would harm your chances of winning you’d have a right to say you don’t want to play anymore (pick up your ball and go home). When the Union of States was put together they based it on the United States Constitition. The Constitution was the “rules of the game” for everyone to play by. Now it would seem the Supreme Court rulings seem to be altering these rules in a way that is detrimental to conservative states. By that reasoning, states that don’t agree will start to talk secession as an alternative to living under rules that harm them. With regard to the way states hold elections. The liberal argument on this subject is that the states have the right to hold elections any way they want. And I would agree, after all I’m a strong supporter of state’s rights. But, if a state allows its voting to be compromised in any way that affects the lives of people in other states those other states that’s not going to work for many people. Its why I think the 17 (possibly more) states that said the Supreme Court should overturn the 2020 election results in contested were right. The cases were thrown out on a technical merit regarding “legal standing.” We’ll do a more thorough report on what the term means. But in short the court said that the states couldn’t have the case heard because another state’s election didn’t affect them…they had no standing. I strongly disagree and I digress, this process will start heating up the talks of secession.