Appeals court rejects Trump campaign’s Pennsylvania lawsuit, setting up Supreme Court next

Just the News ^ | November 27, 2020 | Sophie Mann

[gattaca]

The president's campaign will continue pushing their legal fight toward the Supreme Court

The Trump 2020 campaign's legal team suffered another blow in court on Friday, as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia rejected the attorneys' effort to contest the results of the presidential election in Pennsylvania.

Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel that reviewed the appeal, "Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."

Trump's attorneys have vowed to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, despite the round dismissal from the appeals court.

Senior strategy adviser for the Trump campaign Steve Cortes told Just the News that "We will be appealing to the United States Supreme Court, which has always been where we wanted to end up. The sooner the better. We want to make these cases before the high court and we believe we have a compelling argument to make."

The case was argued last week by President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who presented the case that the results of the election had been undermined by widespread voter fraud across Pennsylvania. But Giuliani offered little tangible evidence to fortify his claims.

All three of the judges on Friday's panel of 3rd U.S. Circuit Court judges were appointed by Republicans, including Judge Bibas who is a Trump appointee. Until 2019, President Trump's sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, sat on the court for two decades.

On Tuesday, the state of Pennsylvania certified its election results in favor of Joe Biden, who will officially receive the Keystone State's 20 electoral votes. Biden led Trump in Pennsylvania by about 80,000 votes.

Following Friday's ruling, senior Trump campaign attorney Jenna Ellis tweeted, "The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover up the allegations of massive fraud. On to SCOTUS!"

[Widget Jr]

The courts know PA is going to the USSC, since ALito was involved. They are just getting out of the way and letting this go to the USSC.

[servantboy777]

I believe the Trump team wanted to plead their case before the SCOTUS...am I wrong?

[JohnnyP]

“ Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”
What would have happened if Rudy had said “ Your honor, I have here 100 affidavits of witnesses to election fraud. May I present them in evidence to this court, and if not, who will hear this evidence?

[Sasparilla]

Nothing can be changed at SCOTUS. They will evaluate based on the evidence & presented & the record of the appellate hearing.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

If Biden somehow gets in, then the rule of law and voting means absolutely nothing. We will officially be a 3rd-world country and I’ll be taking proactive measures accordingly.

[Armscor38]

“The claim that Biden received 80,000,000 votes is a LIE.”

The hate in this country towards PDJT runs wide and deep. Biden didn’t get 80 million votes. The candidate who wasn’t Trump got that many.

[Bullish]

Good. Let’s get this to where it needs to be.

[glimmerman70]

Lol. This is only getting started. They have evidence and will prevail. He will win and get another 4 years and the democrats will cry.

[depressed in 06]

Will the Sniffer concede?

[blueunicorn6]

Another of THE TESTS OF TRUTH is:

Logical Consistency

There is no logical consistency in your statement.

Your statement is a lie.

[gw-ington]

From the Appeals Court ruling: "Most of the claims in the Second Amended Complaint boil down to issues of state law. But Pennsylvania law is willing to overlook many technical defects. It favors counting votes as long as there is no fraud. Indeed, the Campaign has already litigated and lost many of these issues in state courts ... its allegations are vague and conclusory. It never alleges that anyone treated the Trump campaign or Trump votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or Biden votes. And federal law does not require poll watchers or specify how they may observe. It also says nothing about curing technical state-law errors in ballots. Each of these defects is fatal, and the proposed Second Amended Complaint does not fix them. So the District Court properly denied leave to amend again. Nor does the Campaign deserve an injunction to undo Pennsylvania’s certification of its votes. The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters. Plus, tossing out millions of mail-in ballots would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate and upsetting all down-ballot races too. That remedy would be grossly disproportionate to the procedural challenges raised. So we deny the motion for an injunction pending appeal." [NOTE: I added underlines for emphasis.]

[Steve_Seattle]

"Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."

It was my understanding that the filings offered numerous specific allegations, along with affidavits supporting them. As for proof, I thought that was supposed to be determined in a full hearing, not simply in the filings.

[glimmerman70]

It can they show more or different evidence to SCOTUS than was done earlier. Should have asked the question better the first time.

[pburgh01]

Evidence in the way of affidavits is only applicable if you a half Mexican half Negroid Democrat tranny. All else is “Conspiracy theory” according to the legal intelligencia. I think this circuit court judge was a Trump appointee. How disappointing. This pantload will be a real peach in coming years...lockdowns for the common cold, imminent domain for tearing down of William Penn states to be replaced by Harvey Milk statues, charter schools being outlawed. etc.

[Saveourcountry]

You are wrong about that. There is no way that 80 MILLION people - mainly in the important swing states (as Biden underperformed terribly WITH EVERY VOTER GROUP in the states that didn’t matter) turned out to vote against Trump. There is also NO WAY that black people hate Trump so much that they voted in higher numbers against him than they did for the candidate that they loved, Barack Obama.

[Drew68]

I must be missing something. I don’t understand how President Trump could allow a lawsuit to be filed with “no allegations and no proof”.

The president doesn't expect to win, he just wants to go down fighting. He'll never concede and he'll never admit he lost. And that's OK.

[MayflowerMadam]

“Can they change anything before it goes to Supreme Court or does it have to be the same case.”

I heard someone say they have to present the exact case presented in the lower court. No tweaking. Don’t know if that’s true or not, but what someone said.

[Flavious_Maximus]

So the banana court is saying whoever can manufacture the most illegal votes wins. Case closed.

And then they have the gall to call it a fair and honest election. /spit.

[jmclemore]

Failing forward toward to the SCOTUS trying to outrun a deadline....

[maxwellsmart_agent]

And now you can see clearly why the democrats fought tooth and nail to try to prevent Amy Coney Barrett from being seated on the Supreme Court. She wll counter liberal Justice John Roberts and swing the Supreme Court to the conservative side for a change.