Posted on 12/08/2020 5:41:35 AM PST by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution.
Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were “voting irregularities” in these states as a result of the above.
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:
Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect—they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.
"This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law..."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Taxation? The electoral college is not voting on taxes. It’s voting for a President. Aside from being a generalized grievance, that the man the electoral college ultimately elects might one day sign or veto a law relating to taxation is exactly the sort of “conjectural” or “hypothetical,” rather than “actual” or “imminent”, injury that does not confer standing.
Where in the 12th Amendment does it provide that states that violate the 14th Amendment (which did not exist at the time) forfeit their electoral college appointments?
I’m not sure how else I can explain standing, but the violation of one person’s rights does not confer standing on a different person to sue over those rights. Texas plainly lacks standing to litigate the 14th Amendment rights of Pennsylvania voters.
Since the Pennsylvania legislature has joined the case with Texas, because the Gov. unilaterally changed election laws, by your explanation gives, this is standing.
The real issue has yet to be answered. Can entities change election laws outside of the State legislature, that disenfranchise voters by illegal dilution, be held accountable BEFORE the permanent damage of that crime? Can you win by Fraud and crime? If illegal voting practices organized nationwide damage everyone’s 14th Amendment and civil rights, how do they collectively get remedy?
If crime can win elections, then by all means let the States that violated the Constitution seat electors. If they did illegal acts, they can’t seat electors, and that means nobody gets to 270. The 12 th Amendment is a solution for the problem of failure to achieve 270.
Historically the writers and signers of the Constitution knew it would serve a moral and just people. There is nothing moral or just in breaking the election laws, and expecting your voice to be heard by that act. This isn’t CO2, this isn’t a maybe, this was an organized criminal act to deprive people of their right to a free election.
The water rising few inches a century can be dealt with. This type of damage is irreparable, it will lead to the end of the Republic. These are the types of issues that required formation of the Judicial as an equal branch in the first place. They can’t ignore it, because silence will lead to violence.
If the SC punts this they will only be making the situation worse by failing to address the problem.
The leftists will never self-regulate, they can’t because they believe so absolutely in their own moral superiority. They believe they have a right and a duty to rule over the rest of us by any means necessary. Failure of political leaders to recognize this will destroy this nation.
That would have helped with standing, but that is not what happened. Some members of the PA legislature requested leave to file amicus curae briefs. That is not the same as becoming a party. The standing of an amicus filer is irrelevant because they aren’t parties.
The ideal situation for an Electors Clause suit would be for the PA legislature, or some of its members, to have sued the PA Secretary of State (not the state itself) in state or federal district court (not directly in the Supreme Court), ideally before the election. But that didn’t happen, for whatever reason.
Trump or his campaign may also be proper plaintiffs to such a suit, although there is some dispute on that. The campaign in fact did sue in federal court. The Electors’ Clause claim in federal Court was dismissed for lack of standing—the district judge held that only the legislature has standing for that claim, and the campaign did not really argue against that in the district court. The campaign appealed the case to the 3rd Circuit, but they did not appeal that ruling.
You were right. Refused to hear.
When voter fraud occurs you cannot get relief via the courts.
The solution is obvious. You have to cheat more than your opponent to win, in a never ending race to anarchy. The alternative is to accept until the eventual conflict starts.
There will be blood, it’s obvious now. Probably starts when they come to confiscate firearms is my guess.
That is not true at all. To get any relief from a court, a party that has a justiciable interest in the case can file in a court with jurisdiction to hear the case. That didn’t happen here, for reasons I have explained as nauseam.
I also don’t see how you draw that conclusion from this case. Neither Texas nor Trump sued over voter fraud in this case. In fact, I can’t think of any cases where Trump has actually sued over voter fraud except the federal suit in Pennsylvania, and in that case he abandoned his voter fraud claims.
The Constitution commits the manner of appointing presidential electors to the direction of the state legislatures. The state legislatures in most states have provided the method by which disputes in the election of presidential electors—including allegations of voter fraud—are resolved. That is usually by filing an election challenge in state court, under the procedures set forth by that state’s laws. In others, it probably involves filing a quo warrants action after the certification, as one of the Michigan Supreme Court justices explained. So you absolutely can get relief: the candidate can file an election challenge in state court under state law, and then prove the voter fraud to the satisfaction of that court.
Trump has filed state court election challenges, and at least one, in Georgia, includes allegations of voter fraud. That case was ongoing, the last I heard.
I say this because most Fraud is uncovered months after an election. This, the person who benefited from the fraud is already in office. This isn’t speculation, this is known fact, and has been written extensively. Herein, the courts refusing this case have given a go ahead to voter fraud by inaction. From now on, everyone will cheat because 1) it’s tough to prove quickly 2) The FBI, DOJ, and the CIA are political extensions and no longer function for the people. 3) Even of cheating occurred, and you prove it, someone has already been sworn in because conspirators can delay the fact finding or suppress the evidence. ( see Michigan machine ‘glitches’)
I won’t hesitate to say, even with the full power of media and DOJ/FBI suppression, the voter fraud that was 2020 will be known to the people eventually. Most Americans already understand, even 30% of Democrats can see it. It was done so haphazardly and badly, that the statistics are incredible to overcome.
Nobody with a brain trusts the DOJ, FBI, and now about 50% + know that the SCOTUS and courts are useless or partisan. The next election will be won by the person or group that cheats the most. Our enemies will print and ship ballots for both sides like they did for the Democrats in this election. They will cut financial deals with both sides. You will NEVER see a free and fair election again. 2016 wasn’t free or fair, it’s just the Democrats didn’t see the Trump voter turnout coming, so the machines were rigged, just not enough. Feel free to search Podesta emails on Wikileaks to understand this fact. Yes, he was meeting with Dominion people to have the machines ‘singing’ for Hillary.
There is no relief available to voter fraud, because you have to have a working government: DOJ, CIA, FBI, Homeland security, and courts that protect the clause in the Constitution that says we are guaranteed a Republic. We have NONE of those things. Trump has succeeded in one thing, he has opened the door so that Americans can see how the sausage is being made, how they are lied to and deceived, how our taxpayer money supports Federal and State organizations that cheat and steal elections. No one will leave with illusions anymore that voting really matters.
I use the quote: “it’s not who votes, it’s who counts the votes that matter” and the next step in politics “real political power comes at the end of a barrel of a gun”. We have now arrived at the last, because no timely Avenue exists for people to deal with the counting problem. I promise you that the other courts and legal entities will deny, deny, and stall and no relief will be achievable. The Republic is over, it died because people were to stupid to realize that POTUS come and POTUS go, but the system had to be protected.
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.