Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin at Supreme Court over Election Rules

Breitbart ^ | Dec 7, 2020 | Joel B. Pollack

[demkicker]

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.

[BradyLS]

FILED! Did’ye hear?!?

No announcement. No preamble. No “we’re gonna.”

They just DID IT!

I love it! :-D

[CA Conservative]

Regardless of the outcome, this makes me proud to be a Texan!

[Irish Eyes]

Bookmark

[StAnDeliver]

Note that this case specifically cites Republican Party PA v Boockvar, wherein Justice Alito Ordered [PDF] that "all (PA) ballots received by mail after 8:00 p.m. on November 3 be segregated and kept “in a secure, safe and sealed container separate from other voted ballots”.

This is the foot-in-the-door, ie, Texas cites this to bring it into their case, knowing Alito was friendly to Republican Party PA. This is what I said about that case 11 days ago:

"Speaking of, Roberts doesn't want this case. He fears this case, because Trump can take his pound of flesh and prove PA (Philly) was completely illegitimate, and yet Roberts has no remedy (remember, Alito's Order was disregarded, we can't go back and 'unscramble' these co-mingled past-the-post fraudulent votes now), other than the in extremis options of voiding the PA election OR giving it over to the same PA legislature that produced the unconstitutional Act 77. Literally a rock and a hard place."

[mkleesma]

Great!
Now, if only more states have the collective balls to step up!

[redgolum]

Should have happened weeks ago. At this point, it hints of theater.

But I hope it will work.

[Parley Baer]

“I see Ted Cruz’s finger prints all over it.”

I would like to think that is true.

[Parley Baer]

“Trey Gowdy’s name will forever be linked in my mind to showboating hearings that go nowhere.”

.....and Lindsay Graham.

[Parley Baer]

“If on candidate gets a majority, then the new House of Representatives chooses the President, but with each state getting one vote...in which case very likely Trump wins.”

I agree

[RitaOK]

Tell me more, about Cornyn. I had to pry my gritted teeth open after having to vote for him over his last two contests.

Lesser evil voting for RINOS has played it’s part in America’s slide into lawlessness.

[demkicker]

Very well said! I just don’t see how the SC could deny this appeal.

[demkicker]

GOVERNOR DESANTIS: Please get Florida on board with this.

Would love to see a class action suit in the SCOTUS with all the Trump states as the plaintiff class, if that’s even a thing.

Sounds like a great idea to me unless it delays the Texas suit.

[demkicker]

I certainly think Texas has standing to complain that illegal ballots were cast in other states for its citizens, as that is a violation of federal law and puts its citizens in criminal jeopardy. Beyond that narrow issue, I don't know that the argument has merit, but I am not deciding the case.

The main point is that the Legislators of these states did not approve the election changes, which is clearly unconstitutional. Therefore, allowing these states to violate the Federal Law jeopardizes the entire Presidential election.

[demkicker]

Love your answer!

[mylife]

Go Paxton Go!

[Dr. Franklin]

The main point is that the Legislators of these states did not approve the election changes, which is clearly unconstitutional. Therefore, allowing these states to violate the Federal Law jeopardizes the entire Presidential election.

Right, but the legal issue is standing, i.e., who has the right to complain about that? I should think that the voters in a state with systemic fraud, the candidate, a political party, the electors, the state, its legislature, all should have standing to request a remedy. If I were a judge in the lower courts, SCOTUS would not be needed...I don't know that other states have an injury such that they have standing. The dates for the Electoral College meeting, and counting the votes in Congress are set by the U.S. Constitution. SCOTUS can't and won't change that.

[Fawn]

He said they would come back on live of the SCOTUS took some action today.

Does SCOTUS have any time limit? Can they put this off till Feb if they wanted?

[Night Hides Not]

We fought a Revolution and kicked a king’s ass for less than what is being done against us.

...and during a smallpox epidemic, to boot.

[luvie]

I sure will. :)

[StAnDeliver]

It's done. We're in. SCOTUS took Texas.

We need a live thread starting now to gather as much amicus as we can muster, all the way through the hearing.