Posted on 12/08/2020 7:49:33 AM PST by libstripper
Ok the question must be asked because the issue keeps being brought up by the liberal wing of the court everytime a similar lawsuit is filed. Does Texas have any standing as to the internal affairs of these 4 other states?
l8r
This is really a good idea. Every citizen’s rights are violated when a group of states sets out to steal the Presidency. As a civil rights violation it’s the biggest in our history. Thus, imposing direct court supervision on the remaining proceedings is essential to protect everyone’s most vital rights.
I suggest you read the suit. It makes a good argument for standing, saying that because these states used non-Constitutional means to throw the electoral votes to Biden, it has disenfranchised Texas voters, who voted for Trump using Constitutional means. Further, because of the unique power of the VPOTUS in issues before the Senate, states have a compelling right that VPOTUS be elected only through clear Constitutional means.
I have been praying for this. I am from Texas and have been going to rallies and demonstrations in other parts of the country because I want to show that support for Stopping The Steal is not limited to a few states. If states don’t follow the US Constitution, then that affects my legal vote in Texas. One state suing another state is one of a few ways to file directly with the US Supreme Court. That it was done on “Safe Harbor Day” is good. I hope all the other Republican governed states join in the suit. To hope that Dim states would also join would be folly.
Two problems with the suit. One, voters in Texas were not disenfranchised. They were able to vote for the candidate of their choice in a open election with little if any voter fraud. Their interests were not damaged in any way. Two, even if Texas voters had been disenfranchised the remediation that they are seeking is to disenfranchise every voter in the four states in question. No court is going to agree to that.
I agree. This is the ONE!
The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000. For former Vice President Biden to win these four States collectively, the odds of that event happening decrease to less than one in a quadrillion to the fourth power (i.e., 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,0004). See Decl. of Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D. (“Cicchetti Decl.”) at ¶¶ 14-21, 30-31. See App. 4a-7a, 9a.
“Actually, I am trying to figure out the argument where Texas has any standing on what the other states do.”
If Texas doesn’t have standing, then who or what does? Can a fraudulent election not be challenged under the Vermont Lt rules of procedure?
The jurisdictional problem isn’t the “between two or more states” part, but the “controversies” part, a component of which is standing. While the Supreme Court has original, as opposed to appellate, jurisdiction over controversies between states, there has to be a “controversy” in order for there to be any jurisdiction at all, which means the state filing the lawsuit has to have standing.
I think the idea that Texas has standing because its citizens could, hypothetically, be sent off to war in the future by a President who was elected by electors who were improperly appointed by another state would stretch the concept of standing to the point that it becomes meaningless as a limitation on judicial power.
Depending on the specific complaint, there are scenarios where the campaign, the elector candidates from that state, the state legislature (or individual legislators), or even individual voters from that state may have standing to sue over various issues regarding the appointment of a state’s Presidential electors. But I don’t see any scenario where another state would have standing.
The suit focuses only on presidential electors in a federal election, not the down-ballot elections that are fully each separate state's concern.
The Equal Protection argument is that the lawful votes of Texas citizens are diminished when other states allow fraudulently-produced ballots (be they cast by illegal aliens, felons, repeat voters, or manufactured in the names of dead former residents) to be counted.
It is a 14th Amendment violation. Texas has drawn its line in the sand. Again.
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.