Texas Files Lawsuit at SCOTUS Against GA, PA, MI, and WI

[miketx]

Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!

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

Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before midnight on Monday challenging election results in four other states.

www.breitbart.com

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.​

Texas is the crookedest state in the union. Texas has no standing as they cannot prove any harm.

Asking for more consistency and uniformity in the Electors Clause is “crooked”? How? The lawsuit brought on by Texas will most likely not change the outcome of the ‘20 Election but it will give US some necessary structure around voting integrity moving forward and not having future elections be conducted like some third world, banana republic.

The state of Texas has no standing and cannot demonstrate any harm. Any structure is up to the individual states Texas has no say in this. You are the ones who are trying to turn this into a third world banana republic. These arguments have been rejected by federal and state judges. Republican and Democrat and even judges appointed bt Trump.

All Texas has to do is get their AG or their SC to pass it along to the SC.

Yes, most conservatives are truly this ignorant of our judicial system.

.

 

[edthecynic]

Here is the genius of this lawsuit...

Texas has NO standing. Obviously the GOP lies about their support for FEDERALISM! No surprise there!!!!!

 

[BlindBoo]

Also, in every State only the Legislature can create rules of election.

Nope. They could decide how a state chooses it's presidential electors. Not how the elections are run in the States. Each states legislature's have bound it's electors to the popular vote.

False. Only State Legislature's can create, amend, or nullify election laws in their State. Governors, State Attorney Generals, and local election officials have no such legal authority.

So Governor Whitmer didn't need to sign these bills?

Michigan Makes Positive Election Law Changes | Bipartisan Policy Center

The Michigan legislature recently passed two bipartisan election laws and sent them to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) for her signature. Election officials initiated these…

bipartisanpolicy.org

 

[miketx]

We cannot not allowing cheating democrats to ignore the Constitution

Biden cannot and will not cheat his way to the Presidency

Translation: we don't like the results of the election so we'll claim fraud without evidence and if the courts won't give us our way, we'll try and get the Republican state legislatures to install our candidate.

Oh there's evidence all right. Its on another thread on this board. Look it up.

Texas sues PA, GA, and three others. Texas has a very good case.

Texas has a shit case that is little more than theater for dipshits.

First, Texas doesn't have standing for the election laws in other states. This alone ends any viable legal challenge. But wait, there's more!

Second, the States in question have found no violations of their own election laws. The issues have been adjudicated. Killing the legal challenge again. But lets kick the dead horse, shall we?

Third, if this were genuinely a constitutional challenge to mail in ballots and not a political stunt, Texas would have filed suit against ALL states that used mail in ballots. Including, say, California. They didn't. They targeted only the swing States. Stripping the suit of even its internal logic.

Fourth, the Doctrine of Laches. If Texas genuinely felt that these changes would have invalidated Texas votes, they could have filed suit months and months ago. Instead, they waited to see results of the election. And only then filed suits based on those results. That's not how the law works. If the harm is in the process, you don't want to see if you like the results of the process before you sue.

Fifth, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud that the suit's logic is predicated on.

Sixth, the remedy that Texas is seeking is extreme. Delaying the electoral vote itself? Disenfranchising tens of millions of voters? Its absolutely unprecedented. Extreme remedies require extreme evidence. And Texas has none.

Seventh, waiting until the Safe Harbor day to file the suit demonstrates that Texas has no real interest in pursuing their suit. As they waited until the last possible moment to file, when their suit had the least possibility of being heard and the remedy offered.

Texas DOES have standing in other states if their right to equal protection is effected by what
Michigan and Georgia does, for instance. By changing their own election law improperly those
five states disenfranchise every Trump voter in America!

Nope. The rules that Texas is challenging are internal to each State. Texas doesn't get a say in how those rules are implemented outside of Texas. And the issues of raised by Texas are just rehashes of cases that have already been adjudicated in the State courts.

And rejected. There are no violations per the States themselves. And the rules for the election are internal to the State.

Its a closed loop. And Texas is outside the loop.

Secondly you are arguing an asinine point. There is no indication AT ALL that those others states
took any interest in investigating how they were making a mockery of their own election laws.
Why would they find fault with what they were doing? This is absolutely idiotic!
It demonstrates what a shitty desperate thinker you are.

The Supreme Court is not an investigatory court. Its an appeals court. If you're demanding investigations be redone to your satisfaction, you're confused on what the Supreme Court does.

Keep on spewing the fear is overwhelming you.

 

[Skylar]

Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!

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

Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before midnight on Monday challenging election results in four other states.

www.breitbart.com

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.​

Texas is the crookedest state in the union. Texas has no standing as they cannot prove any harm.

You smell that? It's called desperation and fear ya lying commie turd.

Or.....your own wishful thinking?

By far, the most likely outcome of Texas' petition for writ is nothing. Just being denied.

All legally cast votes must be evaluated in each State under exactly the same criteria.

Legally cast, according to who? Again, election rules are internal to each State. And the States have found that the ballots cast and counted for their certified tallies were legal. The issues have already been adjudicated in each state and no 'illegal' ballots have been counted.

That Texas says 'uh-uh' is legally meaningless. As it has no say in any States election laws save its own.

If Wayne County Michigan as an example used a different criteria to evaluate mail in votes than another County in Michigan that is a equal protection case. That is what the Supreme Court must decide.

The Supreme Court is under no obligation to 'decide' anything. Almost all petitions for writs are denied.

By far, the most likely outcome for this writ is the same: Denial.

 

[mdk]

Be sure to have your clutching pearls ready when the Supreme Court doesn’t grant certiorari.

 

[Billiejeens]

We cannot not allowing cheating democrats to ignore the Constitution

Biden cannot and will not cheat his way to the Presidency

Translation: we don't like the results of the election so we'll claim fraud without evidence and if the courts won't give us our way, we'll try and get the Republican state legislatures to install our candidate.

Oh there's evidence all right. Its on another thread on this board. Look it up.

Texas sues PA, GA, and three others. Texas has a very good case.

Texas has a shit case that is little more than theater for dipshits.

First, Texas doesn't have standing for the election laws in other states. This alone ends any viable legal challenge. But wait, there's more!

Second, the States in question have found no violations of their own election laws. The issues have been adjudicated. Killing the legal challenge again. But lets kick the dead horse, shall we?

Third, if this were genuinely a constitutional challenge to mail in ballots and not a political stunt, Texas would have filed suit against ALL states that used mail in ballots. Including, say, California. They didn't. They targeted only the swing States. Stripping the suit of even its internal logic.

Fourth, the Doctrine of Laches. If Texas genuinely felt that these changes would have invalidated Texas votes, they could have filed suit months and months ago. Instead, they waited to see results of the election. And only then filed suits based on those results. That's not how the law works. If the harm is in the process, you don't want to see if you like the results of the process before you sue.

Fifth, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud that the suit's logic is predicated on.

Sixth, the remedy that Texas is seeking is extreme. Delaying the electoral vote itself? Disenfranchising tens of millions of voters? Its absolutely unprecedented. Extreme remedies require extreme evidence. And Texas has none.

Seventh, waiting until the Safe Harbor day to file the suit demonstrates that Texas has no real interest in pursuing their suit. As they waited until the last possible moment to file, when their suit had the least possibility of being heard and the remedy offered.

If you say so. I'd bet the SC will be saying something entirely different. LOL

The petition for the writ of certiorari hasn't been granted.

We're explaining to you why.

You're not
So stop

 

[miketx]

Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!

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

Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before midnight on Monday challenging election results in four other states.

www.breitbart.com

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.​

Texas is the crookedest state in the union. Texas has no standing as they cannot prove any harm.

You smell that? It's called desperation and fear ya lying commie turd.

Or.....your own wishful thinking?

By far, the most likely outcome of Texas' petition for writ is nothing. Just being denied.

All legally cast votes must be evaluated in each State under exactly the same criteria.

Legally case, according to who? Again, election rules are internal to each State. And the States have found that the ballots cast and counted for their certified tallies were legal. The issues have already been adjudicated in each state and no 'illegal' ballots have been counted.

That Texas says 'uh-uh' is legally meaningless. As it has no say in any States election laws save its own.

If Wayne County Michigan as an example used a different criteria to evaluate mail in votes than another County in Michigan that is a equal protection case. That is what the Supreme Court must decide.

The Supreme Court is under no obligation to 'decide' anything. Almost all petitions for writs are denied.

By far, the most likely outcome for this writ is the same: Denial.

yes, you chinese are in denial.

 

[Billiejeens]

We cannot not allowing cheating democrats to ignore the Constitution

Biden cannot and will not cheat his way to the Presidency

Translation: we don't like the results of the election so we'll claim fraud without evidence and if the courts won't give us our way, we'll try and get the Republican state legislatures to install our candidate.

Oh there's evidence all right. Its on another thread on this board. Look it up.

Texas sues PA, GA, and three others. Texas has a very good case.

Texas has a shit case that is little more than theater for dipshits.

First, Texas doesn't have standing for the election laws in other states. This alone ends any viable legal challenge. But wait, there's more!

Second, the States in question have found no violations of their own election laws. The issues have been adjudicated. Killing the legal challenge again. But lets kick the dead horse, shall we?

Third, if this were genuinely a constitutional challenge to mail in ballots and not a political stunt, Texas would have filed suit against ALL states that used mail in ballots. Including, say, California. They didn't. They targeted only the swing States. Stripping the suit of even its internal logic.

Fourth, the Doctrine of Laches. If Texas genuinely felt that these changes would have invalidated Texas votes, they could have filed suit months and months ago. Instead, they waited to see results of the election. And only then filed suits based on those results. That's not how the law works. If the harm is in the process, you don't want to see if you like the results of the process before you sue.

Fifth, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud that the suit's logic is predicated on.

Sixth, the remedy that Texas is seeking is extreme. Delaying the electoral vote itself? Disenfranchising tens of millions of voters? Its absolutely unprecedented. Extreme remedies require extreme evidence. And Texas has none.

Seventh, waiting until the Safe Harbor day to file the suit demonstrates that Texas has no real interest in pursuing their suit. As they waited until the last possible moment to file, when their suit had the least possibility of being heard and the remedy offered.

Texas DOES have standing in other states if their right to equal protection is effected by what
Michigan and Georgia does, for instance. By changing their own election law improperly those
five states disenfranchise every Trump voter in America!

Nope. The rules that Texas is challenging are internal to each State. Texas doesn't get a say in how those rules are implemented outside of Texas. And the issues of raised by Texas are just rehashes of cases that have already been adjudicated in the State courts.

And rejected. There are no violations per the States themselves. And the rules for the election are internal to the State.

Its a closed loop. And Texas is outside the loop.

Secondly you are arguing an asinine point. There is no indication AT ALL that those others states
took any interest in investigating how they were making a mockery of their own election laws.
Why would they find fault with what they were doing? This is absolutely idiotic!
It demonstrates what a shitty desperate thinker you are.

The Supreme Court is not an investigatory court. Its an appeals court. If you're demanding investigations be redone to your satisfaction, you're confused on what the Supreme Court does.

Keep on spewing the fear is overwhelming you.

That one has gone ape shit.

 

[bendog]

Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!

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

Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court before midnight on Monday challenging election results in four other states.

www.breitbart.com

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.​

Texas is the crookedest state in the union. Texas has no standing as they cannot prove any harm.

Asking for more consistency and uniformity in the Electors Clause is “crooked”? How? The lawsuit brought on by Texas will most likely not change the outcome of the ‘20 Election but it will give US some necessary structure around voting integrity moving forward and not having future elections be conducted like some third world, banana republic.

The state of Texas has no standing and cannot demonstrate any harm. Any structure is up to the individual states Texas has no say in this. You are the ones who are trying to turn this into a third world banana republic. These arguments have been rejected by federal and state judges. Republican and Democrat and even judges appointed bt Trump.

All Texas has to do is get their AG or their SC to pass it along to the SC.

Yes, most conservatives are truly this ignorant of our judicial system.

Texas can't rule on what another state is doing in an election.

 

[BlindBoo]

Everything is bigger in Texas. Including my embarrassment caused by Cruz and Paxton.

Trump won Texas, therefore, we're not going to allow other states to have a say in the matter.

Banana Republicans know their days are numbered in Texas

 

[Skylar]

We cannot not allowing cheating democrats to ignore the Constitution

Biden cannot and will not cheat his way to the Presidency

Translation: we don't like the results of the election so we'll claim fraud without evidence and if the courts won't give us our way, we'll try and get the Republican state legislatures to install our candidate.

Oh there's evidence all right. Its on another thread on this board. Look it up.

Texas sues PA, GA, and three others. Texas has a very good case.

Texas has a shit case that is little more than theater for dipshits.

First, Texas doesn't have standing for the election laws in other states. This alone ends any viable legal challenge. But wait, there's more!

Second, the States in question have found no violations of their own election laws. The issues have been adjudicated. Killing the legal challenge again. But lets kick the dead horse, shall we?

Third, if this were genuinely a constitutional challenge to mail in ballots and not a political stunt, Texas would have filed suit against ALL states that used mail in ballots. Including, say, California. They didn't. They targeted only the swing States. Stripping the suit of even its internal logic.

Fourth, the Doctrine of Laches. If Texas genuinely felt that these changes would have invalidated Texas votes, they could have filed suit months and months ago. Instead, they waited to see results of the election. And only then filed suits based on those results. That's not how the law works. If the harm is in the process, you don't want to see if you like the results of the process before you sue.

Fifth, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud that the suit's logic is predicated on.

Sixth, the remedy that Texas is seeking is extreme. Delaying the electoral vote itself? Disenfranchising tens of millions of voters? Its absolutely unprecedented. Extreme remedies require extreme evidence. And Texas has none.

Seventh, waiting until the Safe Harbor day to file the suit demonstrates that Texas has no real interest in pursuing their suit. As they waited until the last possible moment to file, when their suit had the least possibility of being heard and the remedy offered.

Texas DOES have standing in other states if their right to equal protection is effected by what
Michigan and Georgia does, for instance. By changing their own election law improperly those
five states disenfranchise every Trump voter in America!

Nope. The rules that Texas is challenging are internal to each State. Texas doesn't get a say in how those rules are implemented outside of Texas. And the issues of raised by Texas are just rehashes of cases that have already been adjudicated in the State courts.

And rejected. There are no violations per the States themselves. And the rules for the election are internal to the State.

Its a closed loop. And Texas is outside the loop.

Secondly you are arguing an asinine point. There is no indication AT ALL that those others states
took any interest in investigating how they were making a mockery of their own election laws.
Why would they find fault with what they were doing? This is absolutely idiotic!
It demonstrates what a shitty desperate thinker you are.

The Supreme Court is not an investigatory court. Its an appeals court. If you're demanding investigations be redone to your satisfaction, you're confused on what the Supreme Court does.

Keep on spewing the fear is overwhelming you.

That one has gone ape shit.

I think you may be projecting a tad.

As I've said, this entire petition for writ is just theater for dipshits.

 

[d0gbreath]

Everything is bigger in Texas. Including my embarrassment caused by Cruz and Paxton.

Trump won Texas, therefore, we're not going to allow other states to have a say in the matter.

Even your own ignorance and lack of morals are bigger, newbie.

Is their a kiddie's forum you could sharpen your game up in?

Break election laws and you should have no standing or be able to disenfranchise every other voter in the nation. Is this puzzling for you?

Your high horse puzzles me. We're only disenfranchising 73M, not "every other voter in the nation." The moral majority of 81M voters agrees with me.

 

[Billiejeens]

This case has nothing to do with fraud

Menton fraud in this thread - you are an idiot.

Laws were made
Laws were not followed

Catch on?

 

[Skylar]

Don’t Mess with Texas!
Texas Sues Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin for Unconstitutionally Changing Election Procedures
Texas goes directly to the Supreme Court, requesting the High Court to order these swing states with voting irregularities to allow their legislatures to appoint presidential electors.​

Don't Mess with Texas! Texas Sues Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin for Unconstitutionally Changing Election Procedures | The Stream
8 Dec 2020 ~~ By Al Perrotta
~[snip]~

Just before midnight, the State of Texas threw its massive weight into the election fraud fight. Texas sued Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on the grounds their ad-hoc changes to election procedures were unconstitutional. And as a result, violated the rights of Texans and those in other states that followed the constitution. Don’t mess with Texas, indeed.
What’s more, Texas isn’t fiddling around with lower courts. They marched straight to the Supreme Court. And they are requesting the Supreme Court order the offending states to allow their legislatures to appoint their presidential electors.
Dodging State Legislatures Was Dodgy
Breitbart was the first major outlet with the story, and breaks down the argument the Lone Star State is making.

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.​

In their lawsuit, Texas claims “certain officials in the Defendant States” presented the COVID pandemic “as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in balloting.” As streiff at RedState noted, “there’s no pandemic escape hatch in the constitution.”
~[snip]~
Going to the Supreme Court…a Long Shot, Perhaps
Texas approached the Supreme Court directly, Breitbart reports, “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.”
Is the Supreme Court going to hear the case? Twitchy has collected the early reaction of legal types, and the consensus seems to be it’s a long shot the Supreme Court will hear the case, let alone rule in Texas’ favor. Several commentators note that the suit was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, not the state’s solicitor general Kyle Hawkins, who would be the go-to person for suits like this.


Comment:
The Roberts court will either determine that it's none of Texas' business how other states do stuff or that the legistlatures were in session and aware of the changes and did not act, therefore they are implicitly the method determined by the legislature to be appropriate and so once again, buzz of Texas.
This case doesn’t require evidence, it hangs upon the law being changed illegally, before the election.
Every American voter in is being disenfranchised in this National Election by the States who were grossly negligent in their duties to conduct a free and fair election.
All States, who abided by their State Election Rules, should join with Texas and take the scoundrels to court.

There are already threads on this.

 

[miketx]

We cannot not allowing cheating democrats to ignore the Constitution

Biden cannot and will not cheat his way to the Presidency

Translation: we don't like the results of the election so we'll claim fraud without evidence and if the courts won't give us our way, we'll try and get the Republican state legislatures to install our candidate.

Oh there's evidence all right. Its on another thread on this board. Look it up.

Texas sues PA, GA, and three others. Texas has a very good case.

Texas has a shit case that is little more than theater for dipshits.

First, Texas doesn't have standing for the election laws in other states. This alone ends any viable legal challenge. But wait, there's more!

Second, the States in question have found no violations of their own election laws. The issues have been adjudicated. Killing the legal challenge again. But lets kick the dead horse, shall we?

Third, if this were genuinely a constitutional challenge to mail in ballots and not a political stunt, Texas would have filed suit against ALL states that used mail in ballots. Including, say, California. They didn't. They targeted only the swing States. Stripping the suit of even its internal logic.

Fourth, the Doctrine of Laches. If Texas genuinely felt that these changes would have invalidated Texas votes, they could have filed suit months and months ago. Instead, they waited to see results of the election. And only then filed suits based on those results. That's not how the law works. If the harm is in the process, you don't want to see if you like the results of the process before you sue.

Fifth, there's no evidence of widespread voter fraud that the suit's logic is predicated on.

Sixth, the remedy that Texas is seeking is extreme. Delaying the electoral vote itself? Disenfranchising tens of millions of voters? Its absolutely unprecedented. Extreme remedies require extreme evidence. And Texas has none.

Seventh, waiting until the Safe Harbor day to file the suit demonstrates that Texas has no real interest in pursuing their suit. As they waited until the last possible moment to file, when their suit had the least possibility of being heard and the remedy offered.

Texas DOES have standing in other states if their right to equal protection is effected by what
Michigan and Georgia does, for instance. By changing their own election law improperly those
five states disenfranchise every Trump voter in America!

Nope. The rules that Texas is challenging are internal to each State. Texas doesn't get a say in how those rules are implemented outside of Texas. And the issues of raised by Texas are just rehashes of cases that have already been adjudicated in the State courts.

And rejected. There are no violations per the States themselves. And the rules for the election are internal to the State.

Its a closed loop. And Texas is outside the loop.

Secondly you are arguing an asinine point. There is no indication AT ALL that those others states
took any interest in investigating how they were making a mockery of their own election laws.
Why would they find fault with what they were doing? This is absolutely idiotic!
It demonstrates what a shitty desperate thinker you are.

The Supreme Court is not an investigatory court. Its an appeals court. If you're demanding investigations be redone to your satisfaction, you're confused on what the Supreme Court does.

Keep on spewing the fear is overwhelming you.

That one has gone ape shit.

I think you may be projecting a tad.

As I've said, this entire petition for writ is just theater for dipshits.

 

[Skylar]

This case has nothing to do with fraud

Menton fraud in this thread - you are an idiot.

Laws were made
Laws were not followed

Catch on?

Oh, it does. Texas has 3 complaints. The third are 'irregularities' that call into question the 'integrity' of the ballots.

 

[Thunk]

Texas has NO standing.

Yes they do!

 

[Skylar]

Texas has NO standing.

Yes they do!

The supreme court failing to grant their petition for writ says otherwise.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Nope. The rules that Texas is challenging are internal to each State. Texas doesn't get a say in how those rules are implemented outside of Texas. And the issues of raised by Texas are just rehashes of cases that have already been adjudicated in the State courts.

And rejected. There are no violations per the States themselves. And the rules for the election are internal to the State.

Its a closed loop. And Texas is outside the loop.

You are hopelessly corrupt and stupid. Imagine a river running between Pennsylvania and Texas
and in Pennsylvania it is perfectly legal dump highly toxic materials in the river but people in downstream Texas are getting sick and dying because of what happens in Pennsylvania.

In a national election what happens in Penn. effects other states and people.
It is not a "closed loop". Other people throughout the nation are disenfranchised by what happens
in other states and everyone should be playing all under the same rules.

Have some third grader explain to you why cheating isn't fair. This concept seems way beyond you.