Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania And Wisconsin At US Supreme Court Over Election
Posted by freedomforall 5 years, 9 months ago to Government
"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.
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:
Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect—they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.
…
This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.
Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states."
Pennsylvania responds that they should have filed a suit sooner. PA morons now also should be charged with obstruction of justice.
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.
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:
Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect—they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.
…
This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.
Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states."
Pennsylvania responds that they should have filed a suit sooner. PA morons now also should be charged with obstruction of justice.
Late on Tuesday Eric Schmitt, the Attorney General for Missouri, announced he will join Texas in the battle to Supreme Court.
“Election integrity is central to our republic,” said in a tweet Schmitt. “And I will defend it at every turn. As I have in other cases – I will help lead the effort in support of Texas’ #SCOTUS filing today. Missouri is in the fight.”
Election integrity is central to our republic. And I will defend it at every turn.
As I have in other cases - I will help lead the effort in support of Texas’ #SCOTUS filing today.
Missouri is in the fight. https://t.co/V3aLHrYnOF
— Eric Schmitt (@Eric_Schmitt) December 9, 2020
“If other states don’t follow the Constitution and if their state legislature isn’t responsible for overseeing their elections … it affects my state,” said Ken Paxton the Texas Attorney General in an interview with Sean Hannity on Tuesday.
Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit last Monday with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the election procedures conducted in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
“Our job is to make sure the Constitution is followed and that every vote counts. And in this case, I’m not sure every vote was counted. Not in the right way,” continued Paxton.
Attorneys-general of Arkansas and Alabama have now joined Louisiana in backing the push by Texas to challenge the presidential election results in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin before the US Supreme Court.
“After reviewing the motion filed by Texas in the US Supreme Court, I have determined that I will support the motion in all legally appropriate manners. The integrity of our elections is a critical part of our nation and it must be upheld,” Arkansas AG Leslie Rutlege announced on Tuesday evening.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall issued a statement likewise supporting the effort of his Texas colleague Ken Paxton, saying that “unconstitutional actions and fraudulent votes in other states not only affect the citizens of those states, they affect the citizens of all states.”
The four battleground states declared Democrat Joe Biden the victorm based on large numbers of mail-in ballots counted after Election Day.
While Marshall stopped short of signing on to the Texas lawsuit, he said that he expects the Supreme Court to “quickly” decide whether to hear the case, and that the decision will “instruct” Alabama how to continue fighting to ensure election integrity.
Attorney General Jeff Landry's Statement On 2020 Federal Elections And Recent Texas Motion Before The Supreme Court
BATON ROUGE, LA - Attorney General Jeff Landry issued the following statement regarding the ongoing controversies over the 2020 federal election and the new motion put forward by the State of Texas before the U.S. Supreme Court:
“Millions of Louisiana citizens, and tens of millions of our fellow citizens in the country, have deep concerns regarding the conduct of the 2020 federal elections. Deeply rooted in these concerns is the fact that some states appear to have conducted their elections with a disregard to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, many Louisianans have become more frustrated as some in media and the political class try to sidestep legitimate issues for the sake of expediency.
Weeks ago, on behalf of the citizens of Louisiana, my office joined many other states in filing a legal brief with the United States Supreme Court urging the Justices to look into the conduct of the election in Pennsylvania where their state court ignored the U.S. Constitution in regard to the conduct of the election. The U.S. Constitution in Article 1, Section 4, states plainly: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature …” The power for the conduct of federal elections is held by the State Legislatures in each state. In states like Pennsylvania, the judicial branch attempted to seize control of these duties and obligations and to set their own rules. These actions appear to be unconstitutional. If it is unconstitutional for Pennsylvania to take this action, it is similarly unconstitutional for other states to have done the same.
Only the U.S. Supreme Court can ultimately decide cases of real controversy among the states under our Constitution. That is why the Justices should hear and decide the case which we have joined representing the citizens of Louisiana.
Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court should consider the most recent Texas motion, which contains some of the same arguments.
Louisiana citizens are damaged if elections in other states were conducted outside the confines of the Constitution while we obeyed the rules.”
Has anyone else been paying attention to the price of lead?
Here in CA, what cost 30 cents back in February is now nearly two dollars in some places and out of stock in most places.
Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Indiana
Kansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Montana
Nebraska
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Utah
West Virginia
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/m...
In tangentially related news -- has anyone else noticed the increase in the price of ammo? Looks like a 60% jump in the past six months. Not that I am on board for any civil war; it's just that time on the range requires ammo and this price increase is interesting.
When you ask a justice to decide if someone cheated you need proof and lots of it. When you ask a justice to decide if an act was constitutional, that's the Holy grail of US law.
If president Trump finds himself in need of a new attorney general, I highly recommend the guy from Texas, he knows how it's done.