Reality: They tried to remove him from the ballot when there was less than a month available to remove or allow his name to be on the ballot, though his name was on the ballot the decision they will make will involve whether they will count the votes on the 5th of this very month. The election is in November, the speed of the hearing is appropriate, and actually very quick.
Partisan much?
the "Speed of the hearing" is every bit as "appropriate" now with the election even closer and this issues adjudication clock running out. The only way to deny that is a very partisan 'we do not need that questioned answered until after the election', which makes no sense outside a partisan lens.
Like back in the day when Gore was taking it to never ending court and they had to decide before certifying happened...
You really do not understand the history you speak of or you only apply partisan spin.
When the SC rushed to take up the Gore V Bush case, the Florida State legislature already had a date certain where the count would be stopped and Certification had to be entered. That was not the issue and the date was not in peril because ballot issues were being fought in Court by BOTH sides as to whether ballots with hanging chads should be counted or not. At that date certain, as in many States, all recounts and counts cease and certification has to be completed, declaring a winner based on whatever is in.
What the SC did that was reprehensible was that they ordered the count STOPPED, while they heard the case if the count should continue, and then they ruled the count SHOULD continue but since we were up against the Certification deadline there was no longer time to count them, so the count had to be certified as is, and Bush then won.
This was the Roger Stone plan and it was very similar to the plan he and Trump tried to 'stop the counts' as in both cases they knew the outstanding votes favored Gore and Biden and if counted could see them come from behind and win. And a review of all ballots after that showed in fact that Gore would have won if the count was not stopped.
A SC that was being honest would have allowed the count to continue while they ruled, so if they agreed they should be counted, then they would have been, and if they ruled they should not, then they just discard them. BUt they chose a path that even if Gore won in court (and he did), he was still going to lose as they ran out the clock.
This isn't dragging their feet... seriously. If they were acting in their normal scheduling they would, like other things they'll decide to hear now, put it on their calendar for October and you'd hear their decision in the beginning of the next year like they normally do these things.
This IS not a normal schedule thing so you dishonesty here is clear.
You have to compare this to other such emergency appeals where impending deadlines approach where the ruling could have significant impact. This is, by comparison a snails pace, in those rare instances.
