…but they’re back at it. So, we’re writing about them (at least) one more time, OK?

Granted, by the lights of Google, that dogged duo of dissenting Colorado electors, Robert Nemanich and Polly Baca, is getting less and less press. Indeed, only a handful of Colorado media reported their latest Hail Mary on Thursday-an appeal of their previous courtroom setbacks to the Colorado Supreme Court. Yet, even if the dwindling coverage is a pretty good indicator of the electors’ dismal chances of success, that doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t want to know more, right? So, here goes.

You’ll recall the last we’d heard of Baca and Nemanich was on Tuesday, when their quest to help dissenting electors in other states derail the official election of Donald Trump by the nation’s Electoral College this coming Monday was itself derailed in Denver District Court. District Judge Elizabeth A. Starrs ruled that Baca and Nemanich were bound by state law to cast their Electoral College votes for the winner of the state’s popular vote Nov. 8, Hillary Clinton. If they failed to do so, the judge said, they would face repercussions and be replaced by other electors.

It seems that wasn’t enough to deter them, so they’re now knocking on the door of the state’s highest court. 7News Denver reports:

In the appeal, the attorney for Baca and Nemanich argues that being an elector is a federal duty, and thus the Denver District Court never had jurisdiction over the statute in question (the district court judge ruled the court did have jurisdiction).

The attorney also argues that the district court’s interpretation of the Election Code amounted to an “advisory opinion” that was not in line with the actual code.

(Attorney Jesse) Witt says that the code lays out that casting a vote as an elector is a federal duty, pointing to a portion that says “electors shall proceed to perform the duties required of them by the constitution and laws of the United States.”

Witt also filed an emergency motion for expedited briefing and review to try and get the appeal heard before Monday at noon, writing in his motion that the dispute has “substantial implications for Colorado and the United States as a whole.”

Witt said he had been in contact with the clerk at the state Supreme Court and hopes to obtain a ruling before Monday.

Fat chance, you say? We’ll see.

Time is short, of course, but if 2016 has taught us anything about American politics, it is to expect the unexpected. Or, as the greatest pundit of all time put it, it ain’t over ’til it’s over. Even when it might be living on borrowed time.