I might be wrong on this, but thought it to mean that the states that are named in this action have their election procedures detailed in their state constitutions. The state legislatures made some fast new rules about voting/elections, due to Covid (such as extending deadlines and/or ignoring absentee ballot rules, waiving signature requirements, whatever). The state legislatures were not legally allowed to change the rules, since the rules are in the state constitutions. The rules could only be changed by constitutional amendments, which would require being voted upon by the states’ registered voters. This might be worng, but might be part of it, if not the “gist” of it.
Not exactly. Certain agents in these states, in our case in GA it was the SOS, changed election laws without going through their state legislature, which is illegal. So none of the 4 state’s elections were conducted lawfully.
In GA, the SOS changed our signature verification laws in a secret settlement deal with democrats in March 2020.
It’s worse than that. In many cases the SoS made changes that weren’t authorized by the legislature. PA was an example of that.
Mark Levin discusses PA in the above article. You are correct, the Legislature changed the election rules, but it requires a change to the State Constitution which requires a lot to change it. Something like 2/3 yes vote, then put to the voters in a Referendum, etc.
On top of the Legislature changing things (allowing for mail in voting, back in Oct. 2019 pre-Covid), the state courts started changing the Legislature’s rules this year to allow for no signatures, no postmarks, late ballots, etc. Which again was against the state’s constitution, but also against the Federal Constitution iirc.
“””The state legislatures made some fast new rules about voting/elections, due to Covid (such as extending deadlines and/or ignoring absentee ballot rules, waiving signature requirements, whatever).”””
No. That is not correct. It was Secretaries of State and other election officials who made illegal new rules without approval by the legislature.
Regarding covid, the Supreme Court already has stated that is no excuse for being fast and loose.
From the Texas Complaint:
“””“Government is not free to disregard the [the
Constitution] in times of crisis.” Roman Catholic
Diocese of Brooklyn, New York v. Cuomo, 592 U.S. ___
(Nov. 25, 2020) (Gorsuch, J., concurring).”””
It's essentially the opposite of that. It's the state's legislatures who had their Federal Constitutional authority usurped by the states' Executive (Secretary of State, Governor) &/or Judicial branches.
From the Intervention Motion
For example, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State issued guidance purporting to suspend the signature verification requirements, in direct violation of state law. In Michigan, the Secretary of State illegally flooded the state with absentee ballot applications mailed to every registered voter despite the fact that state law strictly limits the ballot application process. In Wisconsin, the largest cities all deployed hundreds of unmanned, unsecured absentee ballot drop boxes that were all invalid means of returning absentee votes under state law. In Georgia, the Secretary of State instituted a series of unlawful policies, including processing ballots weeks before election day and destructively revising signature and identity verification procedures....
To the extent these drastic and fraud-inducing changes in state election law were done without the consent of the state legislature, the federal constitution was violated. Article II provides that only state legislatures can make rules for presidential elections. Election officials—either on their own or in cooperation with courts—cannot change the rules either weeks in advance or in the midst of the election process.
...
It is not necessary for the Plaintiff in Intervention to prove that fraud occurred, however; it is only necessary to demonstrate that the elections in the defendant States materially deviated from the “manner” of choosing electors established by their respective state Legislatures.
Perhaps ironically, President Trump's Intervention Motion here, was submitted by a California lawyer (who's name many might recognize).
John C. Eastman
Counsel of Record
One University Dr.
Orange, CA 92866