SEVEN states have now joined Texas lawsuit

https://www.citizenfreepress.com ^ | 12.08.2020 | Kane

[rxsid]

SEVEN states have now joined Texas lawsuit

Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota and Lousiana…

SEVEN states have now joined Texas lawsuit, arguing that the Equal Protection Clause has been violated in this election from state-to-state. @Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota. #StopTheSteal • #FightForTrump— Ali 🟧 #StopTheSteal (@ali) December 8, 2020

[BigEdLB]

Mississippi is in

[Balding_Eagle]

“Arkansas, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota and Lousiana…”

I don’t know how youall count, but I get to eight.

[Golden Eagle]

It’s expected that the crooked Republicans in Georgia will be fighting AGAINST this, to cover up their crimes.

[CommieCutter]

Now is the time for Holcomb to do what he does best: stand up and follow.

[mosaicwolf]

I am going to contact the Arkansas AG and ask her what the remedy is that the states are seeking. That is important information.

[dfwgator]

Right now it is close to being an SEC vs. Big 10 matchup except for the election fraud travesty that is Georgia.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Conspicuously absent is Georgia.

They're in the suit, as a defendant.

[ought-six]

“SCOTUS doesnt have to “negate or reverse” the election because the results are illegitimate and unconstitutional. All they have to do is affirm that.”

Technically true. But by affirming that the election was illegitimate and unconstitutional SCOTUS is for all practical purposes negating the election. Then the Dems can pull an Andy Jackson and declare “SCOTUS has ruled; now let us see them enforce it!” It would go back to the states, and then we are on a sprint toward civil war. THAT is why I can’t see SCOTUS affirming it. Now, I think SCOTUS SHOULD affirm it, but I don’t see it doing so.

[Zeddicus]

Mara Lago the new Free States of America White House?

[Son House]

Yes, being defrauded after what we know, the physical evidence, which has been supported by statistical evidence and forensic evidence may finally be addressed in a logical way, if that is necessary.

[liberalh8ter]

Yes!

[Osagegirl]

I called Lankford and sent him a nasty email when he said we should accept the election results. He tried to back out of it but nobody believes him

[Linda Frances]

REPUBLICAN PARTY OF PENNSYLVANIA, Petitioner,
v.
KATHY BOOCKVAR, SECRETARY OF PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL.,
Respondents.
______________________
JOSEPH B. SCARNATI III, ET AL., Petitioners,
v.
PENNSYLVANIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY, ET AL., Respondents.
______________________
On Petitions for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
BRIEF OF OKLAHOMA, INDIANA, KANSAS, NEBRASKA, TENNESSEE, AND WEST VIRGINIA AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
CURTIS T. HILL, JR.
INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL
DEREK SCHMIDT
KANSAS ATTORNEY GENERAL
DOUG PETERSON
NEBRASKA ATTORNEY GENERAL
HERBERT H. SLATERY III TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL
PATRICK MORRISEY
WEST VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
MIKE HUNTER
OKLAHOMA ATTORNEY GENERAL
MITHUN MANSINGHANI SOLICITOR GENERAL COUNSEL OF RECORD
BRYAN CLEVELAND
ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
OKLAHOMA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
313 NE TWENTY-FIRST STREET OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105
(405) 521-3921 MITHUN.MANSINGHANI @OAG.OK.GOV
NOVEMBER 9, 2020
COUNSEL FOR AMICI CURIAE

[cgbg]

then we are on a sprint toward civil war.

This is kinda like Dred Scott--the sprint will continue either way...

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

We NEED Kanas, Iowa, Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, Utah, AZ.

[DesertRhino]

Didn’t Elon Musk sell those?!

[mosaicwolf]

I heard today the Supreme Court has already agreed to hear this case.

[mmichaels1970]

SCOTUS is not going to negate or reverse the election.

That’s not what they’d be expected to do. Their job is to rule that the defendant states violated the constitution by changing their election rules without proper legislative action/consent. An “emergency Covid directive” by the Secretary of State is clearly NOT a legislative action. Therefore these state’s elections should be ruled unconstitutional and they should be directed to select their electors in a constitutional manner. Either by a new statewide general election, or by vote of their state legislature. It won’t be up to SCOTUS to determine how. It will be up to the elected legislature of each affected state. And if they are unable, their electoral votes will be 0.

The only wrinkle I can see is if the individual state legislature previously granted broader authority to their SOS to be able to make such rules and changes without legislative consent.

I think it all comes down to this.

[Ruger1099]

And Delaware!

[BigEdLB]

What? A separate suit?