Posted on 12/09/2020 7:34:04 AM PST by Hostage
Quote: In his complaint, Paxton argued that voters in his state were affected by the unconstitutional voting procedures in the other states because in “the shared enterprise of the entire nation electing the president and vice president, equal protection violations in one state can and do adversely affect and diminish the weight of votes cast in states that lawfully abide by the election structure set forth in the Constitution.” And he is absolutely correct. When one or more states violates the U.S. Constitution during a presidential election, that harms everyone that voted, because voters in every state are involved in electing the president.
Here’s an everyday example: You go to a federal surplus auction. You want to bid on a piece of equipment. You have a competitor that can print all the dollars they want on the spot and the auctioneer will accept the counterfeit dollars but you must show real dollars. Why should you even bother to bid? Are you treated equally in the auction? No, you’re not treated the same.
So you take the auctioneer to court and sue them for treating you unequally, from some bidders they will accept counterfeit dollars but you’re not allowed to counterfeit because you have to obey the law.
So at this crooked auction, only crooks can win the bids and take the goods. Is the court going to allow that?
The problem with this analogy is that Texas is not suing the auctioneer (Electoral College). Texas is suing the competitor. Still the right thing to do.
Very few of the lawsuits Trump’s legal team filed since Election Day have really worried the left,
but when Texas AG Ken Paxton filed directly with the USSC Monday, lefties immediately began freaking out.
They are alarmed because even they understand that Paxton’s suit has the potential to flip the election.
Texas is even disregarding the obvious fraud in the early results there, in this case.
Equal protection without accoutrements is the way to go. (h/t Ingtar)
Thank you
I am in Texas and did nit quite understand
Just proud we did it
And proud of the other 9 states, so far.
Houston Astros 2019...
Auctioneer can also be construed as the legislatures of the four defendant states.
Actually, there should be more states than the four defendant states presently named.
The Supreme Court should referee the steal. If there was violation of the U.S. Constitution, the election was not legal in many cases. Is it simply a coincidence, all the problems of fraud are in the battleground states? This fraud had to be orchestrated, supported with big money and hostile foreign countries.
Correct analysis in my opinion. More over, the activity is the competitor is engaged in is criminal. They are using 14A as their basis, which is straightforward.
This case will deal with the federal election, but it doesn’t address the proximate cause of the suit, which is the criminal activity. If there is evidence foreign governments are involved, it’s no longer criminal. It’s constitutional/military.
Regarding the cheating lawsuits, I read a good analogy:
A person is arrested for murder. The DA and the Defense show up in court for their Preliminary Hearing. The judge states: “I haven’t seen any evidence showing this man committed murder, case dismissed!”
btt
Looks to be the last nail in the democrats coffin body parts found all over the place.
The U.S. Constitution isn’t their crossword puzzle where you can fill in any word you like to make it fit.
I think it is also important that it is States that are the plaintiffs. If the plaintiffs were citizens of Texas then the case would be thrown out due to their lack of standing. I would claim that they had standing, but many cases seem to suggest that if a person is not financially harmed by another’s action then they have no standing.
Individual voters have standing but they must start at the lower court and be able to battle uphill against the time deadlines and they must have the legal capital to wage their arguments.
States have ‘original jurisdiction’ so they can start at the very top, the US Supreme Court.
and states have the budget if they commit tot he fight.
The US Supreme Court is going to take a note of significance to a group of States with a sound argument in the context of a historical crisis.
AZ, NV had similar issues as PA, MI, WI, GA. More states are emerging with similar issues.
But your point goes not so much to fraud as it does how states carried out the election against their legislatures approved constitutional processes.
Good point.
There may still be other states added but the present four defendants hold enough Electoral votes to be ‘outcome-determinative’, so it’s enough for now.
Thinking on this further, the President’s lawsuit to intervene (join) Texas, is critical as it goes to real injury and claims FRAUD.
So fraud is a crucial item in the combined suit.
But Eastman says that first, SCOTUS must grant the President’s complaint of intervention.
Well they have so far. </s>
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.