Texas asks U.S. Supreme Court to help Trump upend election
Dec 09 2020
In their petition, they sought to have either the 2.6 million votes cast by mail-in ballot disqualified, or for the court to throw out the entirety of the election results so that the Republican-controlled legislature could appoint Pennsylvania's electors for president.
Trump campaign lawyer Jenna Ellis tweeted, "Don't mess with Texas".
Moreover, election disputes are meant to be resolved by members of Congress when they meet on January 6 to formally count Electoral College votes, constitutional law professor Ned Foley of Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law said.
Texas also argues that its own votes in the presidential election were "debased" by the illegal actions of the other states.
As to the substance of their claim - that the General Assembly had no right to alter Pennsylvania's mail-in voting process, state officials disagree, saying that the only limitation on them in altering the law was to maintain secrecy in the voting process. Although acknowledging that it is up to states to develop election procedures, the claim was that the federal Constitution was violated if the Pennsylvania legislature expanded the mail-in procedure without proper authority from the state constitution. The crux of the argument by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is that the four battleground states failed in their duty to conduct fair elections by distributing absentee ballot applications and ballots and then "ignoring statutory requirements as to how they were received, evaluated and counted".
"Pennsylvania-et-al. -US-Supreme-Court-Motion-To-File-Bill-of-Complaint.pdf" target="_blank">filing says, citing the "appearance of voting irregularities in the Defendant States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States' election laws".
"Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election".
The state Supreme Court certified on November 24 that he won the state by 33,596 votes, or almost 2.4% of the 1.4 million votes cast.
"Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election", Paxton said in announcing the legal action. "We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error".
Rick Hasen, a professor at the University of California at Irvine School of Law, wrote about the suit at his Election Law Blog.
He said in 1966, DE challenged New York's "winner-take-all method of awarding electors".
Dershowitz said, "will the Supreme Court take the case?" Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin have certified their results, but the Trump campaign is continuing to exhaust its legal options, including through a lawsuit filed last week in Wisconsin.
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, said the case was perplexing and likely had a zero percent chance of success.
The Supreme Court is not obligated to hear the case and has said in previous decisions that its "original jurisdiction", which allows it to directly hear litigation between states, should be invoked sparingly.