Posted on 12/08/2020 9:06:01 AM PST by street_lawyer
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf
Lawful elections are at the heart of our freedoms. “No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.” Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, 10 (1964).
Moreover, if this Court agrees with Plaintiff State that Defendant States’ appointment of presidential electors under the recently conducted elections would be unconstitutional, then the statutorily created safe harbor cannot be used as a justification for a violation of the Constitution. The safe-harbor framework created by statute would have to yield in order to ensure that the Constitution was not violated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff States respectfully request that this Court issue the following relief:
A. Declare that Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin administered the 2020 presidential election in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
B. Declare that any electoral college votes cast by such presidential electors appointed in Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin are in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and cannot be counted.
C. Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College.
D. Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College and authorize, pursuant to the Court’s remedial authority, the Defendant States to conduct a special election to appoint presidential electors.
E. If any of Defendant States have already appointed presidential electors to the Electoral College using the 2020 election results, direct such States’ legislatures, pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2 and U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 2, to appoint a new set of presidential electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment, or to appoint no presidential electors at all.
F. Enjoin the Defendant States from certifying presidential electors or otherwise meeting for purposes of the electoral college pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 5, 3 U.S.C. § 7, or applicable law pending further order of this Court.
I love this. I love Texas.
bttt
I wait for action that has meaning to take place. The action that will stop the fraud, the steal and elect Donald Trump to a second term.
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?
I wait for action that has meaning to take place. The action that will stop the fraud, the steal and elect Donald Trump to a second term.
This case will be bigger than Marbury v Madison. It’s the first lawsuit that makes any sense.
I just contacted my AG here in Florida asking her to join Texas...
There is absolutely no doubt that SCOTUS has jurisdiction to here the case, the only sticky issue is whether Texas has the right to challenge the actions taken by the defendants. Does Texas have “standing.” Quotes will be in italics to make it easier for readers to know when something is being quoted from the complaint.
President and the Vice President of the United States are the only elected officials who represent all the voters in the Nation. Voters who cast lawful ballots cannot have their votes diminished by states that administered their 2020 presidential elections in a manner where it is impossible to distinguish a lawful ballot from an unlawful ballot. Sounds like a good argument. To have standing a party must be likely to be negatively affected by a law. Establishing standing to challenge an unconstitutional law is much easier than challenging illegal action by state actors, but the argument makes the point that Texas voters who wanted Trump to win were defrauded and someone must do something about it or there is no point to having the right to vote!
This Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction over this action because it is a “controvers[y] between two or more States” under Article III, § 2, cl. 2 of the U.S. Constitution and 28 U.S.C. § 1251(a) (2018).
I just contacted my AG here in Florida asking her to join Texa
GREAT IDEA EVERY ONE SHOULD FOLLOW YOUR LEAD!
“Does Texas have any standing as to the internal affairs of these 4 other states?”
Yes because the lawful votes of Texas citizens are diminished when other states allow illegal aliens, felons, repeat voters, and purely manufactured ballots to be counted.
It is a 14th Amendment violation because Texans are not receiving equal protection for their votes.
God bless you Megan
What’s with Lou Dobbs scolding Stephen Miller? This is the job of the states. It is bigger than Trump. Of course Texas needs to do this, Ted Cruz, Paxton. The GOP
Thank you! (-:
The past few years I’ve found myself fascinated by law and the Constitution. It’s amazing the ways these laws interact with each other!
This case presents a question of law: Did
Defendant States violate the Electors Clause (or, in
the alternative, the Fourteenth Amendment) by
taking—or allowing—non-legislative actions to
change the election rules that would govern the
appointment of presidential electors?
Excellent response!
“Does Texas have any standing as to the internal affairs of these 4 other states?”
‘Yes because the lawful votes of Texas citizens are diminished when other states allow illegal aliens, felons, repeat voters, and purely manufactured ballots to be counted.
It is a 14th Amendment violation because Texans are not receiving equal protection for their votes.’
4th thread on this same article
Waiting to hear if the Supremes will hear the case.
Looks like this attempt attacks from the constitutional angle, not the fraud angle, which hasn’t borne fruit yet.
Michigan’s crooked leaders deserve this.
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.