Posted on 06/20/2024 9:48:49 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced he is filing a lawsuit against the state of New York for what he called "their direct attack on our democratic process through unconstitutional lawfare against President Trump."
On Thursday, Bailey said on his podcast, "The Bailey Wire," that his office would be taking steps to combat illicit prosecutions against the former president.
Bailey said it's time to restore the rule of law.
"Radical progressives in New York are trying to rig the 2024 election. We have to stand up and fight back," he exclusively told Fox News Digital.
Bailey said the state's actions against Trump sabotage Missourians’ right to a free and fair election.
"We have to fight back against a rogue prosecutor who is trying to take a presidential candidate off the campaign trail," Bailey wrote on X.
Bailey's office noted that the lawsuit will go straight to the U.S. Supreme Court because it is a state versus state action. His office said it will be titled "Missouri vs. New York."
Last month, Bailey probed the Justice Department for documents related to any communications with prosecutors connected to the indictments of former President Trump.
"The investigations and subsequent prosecutions of former President Donald J. Trump appear to have been conducted in coordination with the United States Department of Justice," Bailey alleges, adding that he believes that allegation is demonstrated in part by the move of the third-highest ranking DOJ official, Matthew Colangelo, to the Manhattan DA's office to help prosecute the criminal case, N.Y. v. Trump.
In addition, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg worked alongside New York Attorney General Letitia James in pursuing civil litigation against Trump, using that experience as a springboard from which to campaign for his current position, Bailey notes.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Yes, federal question jurisdiction and standing exists if a federal court agrees with the proposition that such drummed up cases constitute election interference.
I don’t agree with you that Missouri doesn’t have standing. Obviously lawyers in Missouri think they do or they wouldn’t risk getting shot down by the so called “Supreme” Court.
That said, I do agree in general that the Supreme Court (also lawyers) frivously uses “standing” as a way to dodge tough decisions.......so they very well MIGHT, as you say, rule that Missouri has no standing.
AS F’d up as things are right now, most of us pray they won’t throw Missouri out on standing and will act to protect their own sorry assed judciciary..
The last time SCOTUS said Texas didn’t have standing to sue Pennsylvania over not following its own state election laws.
Missouri should do this in state court and subpoena all of the NY officials. Put NY on the defensive to spend time and money. Then wait to see if SCOTUS says NY doesn’t have standing.
EC
THEY WOULD HAVE STANDING SINCE THIS IS A FEDERAL ELECTION—IMO.
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.