A quick comment on the PA response.
It doesn’t appear to address the issues raised in the TX filing.
It appears it responds to what they thought the TX filing would be, rather than what it is, while they try hard to mischaracterize the filing as if it were what they want it to be, and not what it is.
Apparently, Sidney pounding fraud... has them responding to claims of “fraud” in their reply to the TX suit, when the TX suit doesn’t ever address it.
They rail against Texas for asking the court to make Trump president... and ask the court to not do that... when the TX filing is as clear as it can be, and deliberately makes it plain, that they are NOT asking for that.
Either the lawyers are morons... or they think pretending to not understand the TX arguments... will confuse the Justices into not understanding them, or allow them to pretend they don’t ?
Its truly embarrassing. Can’t recall having seen anything worse, ever, presented at this level.
It makes it VERY clear they were not prepared to be called on to respond to the arguments TX made, or to rebut the remedies asked.
On the face of it, if it is decided on the “merits” presented today... I’d give TX the win.
Biggest failing in the PA response...
They spend a lot of time addressing and castigating Texas for all the many suits filed and not won by others in the many states (many of which cases are not yet resolved, contain clear error, and might also be taken up by the Supreme Court) while claiming the complaint Texas filed is not substantively different than those others... and thus should be dismissed with derision.
“Again, as detailed above, other litigants have pursued many of the identical claims in state courts, lower federal courts, and in this Court’s appellate jurisdiction.Texas has not demonstrated that the merits of its claims, already considered and rejected by trial and appellate courts across the Nation, are somehow different.”
“This Court’s original jurisdiction is not an avenue to circumvent the regular certiorari process when claims have been repeatedly rejected by lower courts on the merits.”
This ignores a few things...
First, Texas is not a party to and is not responsible for others actions, nor are its interests either intrinsically parallel to or controlled by them.
Second, it ignores that none of those other cases were about the core issue Texas raises... in multiple states changing their conduct of elections and conducting their elections outside of the requirements of the law, or following law that violates the Constitution, or by altering law in the manner, and altering the law by means that are outside the specific, directive, requirements imposed by the U.S. Constitution.
Third, in dismissing Texas actions in pursing its interests as frivolous, and ridiculing the track record of others suits in inferior courts, they ignore that in the one other instance where the same concerns have been raised... the Pennsylvania case... the court has already mooted the issue.
In effect... the PA response to Texas slaps the SCOTUS in the face for having taken up the PA case... which case the court HAS NOT dismissed...
I have never seen any filing anywhere that is a clearer instance of attorneys shooting themselves in the feet... if not something more vital.