LIZARD KING FORCED TO RUN (or concede the seat)

From the AP via the Houston Chronicle:

Scalia rejects plea to get DeLay off ballot

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia today declined to issue a stay that would allow Texas Republicans to replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the general election ballot.

The Republican Party of Texas had argued in a 41-page motion that it would be in the best interest of voters to allow the Republicans to pick a new candidate for DeLay's 22nd District seat.

Click here for the rest.

The article is a bit misleading because it doesn't spell out what exactly it means by the GOP not getting their injunction. Indeed, I barely read it earlier today, myself, thinking it was just another step on the way to some real judicial action. Then I read this little bit on Kos and it all became clear: the Supreme Court can't hear the case until after the election; without an injunction, DeLay has to either run or concede the seat to his Democratic challenger, Nick Lampson. Either way, it's going to be fun.

But I do have one question. Assuming DeLay loses the election, and the GOP wins its case, will the Republicans have grounds to sue for a "do over" election, pitting Lampson against some yet-to-be named conservative? I'm betting that it's not going to play out that way; Scalia's refusal to grant the injunction strongly suggests that he sees a great deal of merit in the two lower court rulings. But still. One can never be sure whether the Court's right wing is going to be in "strict constructionist" mode or in the conservative "judicial activist" mode that gave their boy the White House in Bush v Gore.

I guess we'll have to wait and see. Until then, as Atrios often says, pass the popcorn.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$