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

[boilermaker55]

FBI is investigating Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, AP report says
You mean this crook.
And then texASS cries about state sovereignty
Blow it out your ASS. texASS.

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.​

 

[Ben Thomson]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Which is why the SCOTUS ruled 9-0 against republican attempts to overturn Pennsylvania's election.

 

[JimBowie1958]

^^^^- another dumbass post.

 

[Rogue AI]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Your statement in reply to the OP can only be evaluated as another ignorant partisan hack venting his spleen of election Blue Bile!

Tissue?

Your lame reply can only be evaluated as you being an idiot. You folks still don't get what this is about because the liberal media isn't talking about it.

 

[Billiejeens]

So we agree that courts don't
Or are not supposed to
Write legislation.
They are tasked with interpreting legislation.

They don't write the book.
But they edit it for clarity.

No

 

[Billiejeens]

Great.

Did the states bypass their own constitution and laws to change voting laws?

I don't think so. Do you have any examples from the lawsuit that you think are relevant?

the argument seems to be that the state constitution has rules for "absentee ballots", and they sought to create a new class of balloting not defined in the constitution

So the state legislature created a new type of ballot, called a "mail-in" ballot, under rules the state legislature enacted.

They created it after the fact.

Fucking moron, Pennsylvania used mail-in ballots in their primary election in accordance with the new law. Republicans had their opportunity then to challenge the constitutionality of that law if it were really a problem for them. They don't get to sit on that position and wait to see if they win or lose an election, and then attempt to disenfranchise 2.6 million voters because they lost the election over a law that was constitutional when the election was held and the voters followed the law.

Poor fawn.

 

[Rogue AI]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Which is why the ruled 9-0 against republican attempts to overturn Pennsylvania's election.

They didn't deny cert. They denied immediate injunction. Your liberal media is misinforming you again.

 

[Claudette]

Law states changing the election process requires going through the legislature.

Please show me where these 4 states did that.

Here's one that went through the legislature.

Harrisburg, PA – Governor Wolf made voting more convenient and secure by signing Act 77 of 2019, the most significant improvement to Pennsylvania’s elections in more than 80 years. The bipartisan compromise legislation takes effect for the April 2020 primary election and makes Pennsylvania a national leader with voter-friendly election reforms.

Governor Wolf Signs Election Reform Bill Including New Mail-in Voting

Governor Wolf made voting more convenient and secure by signing Act 77 of 2019, the most significant improvement to Pennsylvania’s elections in more than 80 years. The bipartisan compromise legislation takes effect for the April 2020 primary election and makes Pennsylvania a national leader with...

www.governor.pa.gov

and that was pre-covid. what did PA do *after* covid to change their systems?

nice try but i'm not chasing your turds down the toilet. please stick to the lawsuit.

You're far too busy chasing Trump's turds down the toilet. The Texas lawsuit will be tossed as well.

When someone tries to overturn the results of a democratic election, it's call a "coup d'etat". Trump is committing sedition in broad daylight, just like his obstruction of justice. That Republicans are cheering him on in this attempt is proof positive that the Republican Party needs to be burned to the ground.

Its not just Texas. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota are getting in on this suite.

Is this a multi-bedroom suite or an orgy room?

The Republican Party, or what passes for the Republican Party, has lost its mind, and is now participating in an attempt coup against the legally elected government of the United States of America. Who elected these idiots as AG's in these states?

American conservatives have now completely abandoned the idea of a Constitutional Republic, and utterly embraced authoritarianism.

Go back to Canada and bug your own people you fucking idiot.

 

[Billiejeens]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Your statement in reply to the OP can only be evaluated as another ignorant partisan hack venting his spleen of election Blue Bile!

Tissue?

Your lame reply can only be evaluated as you being an idiot. You folks still don't get what this is about because the liberal media isn't talking about it.

They are bubblecultists

 

[Concerned American]

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.

Thanks, where did you earn your law degree? A box of Coco Puffs?

 

[Care4all]

this coming from someone who can't point out how these states followed their own constitutional laws.

check mate son. tired of this ball of yarn in front of the kitty game with you. you failed miserably to state a single fact around the case, just spout shit and keep diverting.

as usual.

You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We can worry about the merits of the case after we demonstrate that the case is able to be brought at all.

And once again you simply can't say that these, states followed their own laws.

Pathetic.

The citizens that voted did...they followed the law.... and by super majority, they voted for Biden to be President.

They voted via the laws in front of them, which they were told was a legal way to vote, by State Supreme court's rulings in the suits in the courts.

Disenfranchising these citizen of their constitutional right to vote,

just aint gonna happen...

their legislature choosing electors of their own and not electors representing who their citizens in good faith voted for, is STEALING the election from them.

 

[iceberg]

this coming from someone who can't point out how these states followed their own constitutional laws.

check mate son. tired of this ball of yarn in front of the kitty game with you. you failed miserably to state a single fact around the case, just spout shit and keep diverting.

as usual.

You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We can worry about the merits of the case after we demonstrate that the case is able to be brought at all.

And once again you simply can't say that these, states followed their own laws.

Pathetic.

The citizens that voted did...they followed the law.... and by super majority, they voted for Biden to be President.

They voted via the laws in front of them, which they were told was a legal way to vote, by State Supreme court's rulings in the suits in the courts.

Disenfranchising these citizen of their constitutional right to vote,

just aint gonna happen...

their legislature choosing electors of their own and not electors representing who their citizens in good faith voted for, is STEALING the election from them.

But it's fine if you steal it from them.

 

[Concerned American]

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.​

lol

So much for "state's rights."

The US Constitution protects ALL states, not just swing states. When those swing states violated US constitutional provisions, they violated the rights of the people in every other state. SMH democrats think rights only apply to them.

 

[Concerned American]

this coming from someone who can't point out how these states followed their own constitutional laws.

check mate son. tired of this ball of yarn in front of the kitty game with you. you failed miserably to state a single fact around the case, just spout shit and keep diverting.

as usual.

You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We can worry about the merits of the case after we demonstrate that the case is able to be brought at all.

And once again you simply can't say that these, states followed their own laws.

Pathetic.

The citizens that voted did...they followed the law.... and by super majority, they voted for Biden to be President.

They voted via the laws in front of them, which they were told was a legal way to vote, by State Supreme court's rulings in the suits in the courts.

Disenfranchising these citizen of their constitutional right to vote,

just aint gonna happen...

their legislature choosing electors of their own and not electors representing who their citizens in good faith voted for, is STEALING the election from them.

The democrat leadership of those states allowed for unconstitutional changes to be made to the voting laws. You need to take your concerns up with them.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Probably? Seems you've already decided that "liberal shills" acted improperly or illegally. Odd isn't it that nearly three dozen appeals by the Trump Supporters have been rejected by the Federal Court System. It also seems that most of the judges have been appointed by Republican Presidents.

What is not probable are the facts that the GOP is closely acting with a seditious intent, and also close to violation US Code for inciting a riot:

18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions

An not only Federal Judges and justices, but state justices and judges + AG Barr have found no fraud:

High court rejects GOP bid to halt Biden's Pennsylvania win

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Republicans' last-gasp bid to reverse Pennsylvania's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the electoral battleground. The court without comment refused to call into question the certification process in Pennsylvania. Democratic Gov. Tom...

news.yahoo.com

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Probably? Seems you've already decided that "liberal shills" acted improperly or illegally. Odd isn't it that nearly three dozen appeals by the Trump Supporters have been rejected by the Federal Court System. It also seems that most of the judges have been appointed by Republican Presidents.

What is not probable are the facts that the GOP is closely acting with a seditious intent, and also close to violation US Code for inciting a riot:

18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions

An not only Federal Judges and justices, but state justices and judges + AG Barr have found no fraud:

High court rejects GOP bid to halt Biden's Pennsylvania win

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Republicans' last-gasp bid to reverse Pennsylvania's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the electoral battleground. The court without comment refused to call into question the certification process in Pennsylvania. Democratic Gov. Tom...

news.yahoo.com

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

Cite those instances when state election officials and their "illegal actions" removed all safeguards to fair and free elections and a Title 3 Court's adjudicated decision stated such AS YOU CLAIM! Given you are so sure you have the truth, spread it around and let everyone else in on your vast knowledge of the electoral litigation which has transpired over the last month!

 

[Turtlesoup]

In order to sue...you have to have standing. That means that you have to show that you were harmed by an action you are seeking to litigate.

Texas has no standing. They can not show where they were harmed by how another state runs their election

DENIED

The Hell they can't---------GA and the others fraudulent votes changes the election and nullifies Texas's legal votes. In essence, not only does the corrupt/inept system of these 4 states disenfranchise their voters, but it also disenfranchises all the LEGAL voters in the US. And FYI, I think Texas has more ummmm republican judges appointed than obama ones for their federal district. Saddle up, Texas has a good shot at this.

 

[Care4all]

Dont mess with Texas, ya freaking commies!...

Looks like those pansies have lost their freakin' minds... they have no standing... this is Safe Harbor Day... Rump will get laughed out of court... again.

My guess is this is political theatre and they know it...it makes them look good to the base but they are safe, if won't go anywhere.

RUSSIA.

sorry, that was the exact same thing but felt so justified.

give people the latitude you take for yourself and many problems will poof.

Well, and, no surprise I'm sure, I disagree. There was unanimous consent among our intelligence agencies that Russia was attempting to influence not only OUR election but that of other western countries. Take that and add in Trump & Co.'s numerous contacts with Russian entities (and lying about it) - an investigation was merited. Now was there political theatre from the Dems surrounding it? Of course. Nature of the beast (the bipartisan political beast).

In this case...few truly want to violate the sanctity of the electoral process and have a president APPOINTED. Imagine the results, and the precedent it would set, and the Constitutional questionability. But none of them want to anger Trump. Texas knows this isn't going to go anywhere...so it's red meat for the base who adores Trump.

How come its only the OTHER side doing the violations? Everything the left does you seem to be fine with and defend til death. Everything the right wants is treasonous bullshit.

Russia red meat for left. Wheeee

It's a very "binary" viewpoint offering no room for middle ground or compromise.

...oh not this again.

stop raging at others for what your side loves to do or yes, here we are.

your failure to do amything but attack the right and demonize them speaks volumes.

You just never stop.

Maybe not. But I'm not wrong either.

You non stop attack and demonize the left.

Look to your own.

I've hit on both sides. I try to find common ground to build on. I don't call people trumpians, NAZIS, racists or the like.

I said the left had 3 years to dig and you demanded the time. I have no idea how this will turn out but the right is, entitled to their day in court.

I encourage following our laws and processes. You attack them for trying yet excuse the rioters.

We are worlds apart. But feel as you will, that's fine. I'll do the same.

And, again, you just lie, or you are so into labels you don't actually read what is written. I'm on the left therefore I'm automatically x y z.

Done with attempting to discuss issues with you for now - you just veer off into this shit every single time someone on the left disagrees with you.

I unemotionally gave you my opinion on Russia investigation. I unemotionally gave you my opinion on election fraud. I disagreed with you. And you go apeshit. Every. single. time.

let me try this another way - and lets just stick to the issue. not the people and not how we feel about them, if possible.

did the 4 states Texas is taking to court follow their constitutional process in changing the voting process? if no, just say no they did not. if yes, please provide me some form of link i can read to understand your viewpoint.

i think we rush to the end and never establish baselines, so i'll try to do this again; establish a baseline.

IMO - yes. Challenges have been upheld. PA (I think) might not have BUT, the courts rightfully pointed out that PA ran a primary under those rules, without contention or legal action and to wait 9 months until AFTER the general election to file a suit is disenfranchising thousands of legitimate voters.

So if I rob liqour store 'A' and get away with it, that means they can't arrest me for robbing liqour store 'B?'

The citizens voting robbed no one. They followed what they were told was a legal way to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

 

[Care4all]

this coming from someone who can't point out how these states followed their own constitutional laws.

check mate son. tired of this ball of yarn in front of the kitty game with you. you failed miserably to state a single fact around the case, just spout shit and keep diverting.

as usual.

You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We can worry about the merits of the case after we demonstrate that the case is able to be brought at all.

And once again you simply can't say that these, states followed their own laws.

Pathetic.

The citizens that voted did...they followed the law.... and by super majority, they voted for Biden to be President.

They voted via the laws in front of them, which they were told was a legal way to vote, by State Supreme court's rulings in the suits in the courts.

Disenfranchising these citizen of their constitutional right to vote,

just aint gonna happen...

their legislature choosing electors of their own and not electors representing who their citizens in good faith voted for, is STEALING the election from them.

The democrat leadership of those states allowed for unconstitutional changes to be made to the voting laws. You need to take your concerns up with them.

Not really....these cases were mostly adjudicated...

 

[OKTexas]

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Probably? Seems you've already decided that "liberal shills" acted improperly or illegally. Odd isn't it that nearly three dozen appeals by the Trump Supporters have been rejected by the Federal Court System. It also seems that most of the judges have been appointed by Republican Presidents.

What is not probable are the facts that the GOP is closely acting with a seditious intent, and also close to violation US Code for inciting a riot:

18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions

An not only Federal Judges and justices, but state justices and judges + AG Barr have found no fraud:

High court rejects GOP bid to halt Biden's Pennsylvania win

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Republicans' last-gasp bid to reverse Pennsylvania's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the electoral battleground. The court without comment refused to call into question the certification process in Pennsylvania. Democratic Gov. Tom...

news.yahoo.com

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

The Supreme Court is probably spending its time looking over all the election laws liberal shills violated in the states in question.

Probably? Seems you've already decided that "liberal shills" acted improperly or illegally. Odd isn't it that nearly three dozen appeals by the Trump Supporters have been rejected by the Federal Court System. It also seems that most of the judges have been appointed by Republican Presidents.

What is not probable are the facts that the GOP is closely acting with a seditious intent, and also close to violation US Code for inciting a riot:

18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions

An not only Federal Judges and justices, but state justices and judges + AG Barr have found no fraud:

High court rejects GOP bid to halt Biden's Pennsylvania win

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Republicans' last-gasp bid to reverse Pennsylvania's certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the electoral battleground. The court without comment refused to call into question the certification process in Pennsylvania. Democratic Gov. Tom...

news.yahoo.com

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

They did act illegally. You folks are in for some disappointment. This is about state election officials and their illegal actions that removed all safeguards to fair and free elections.

Cite those instances when state election officials and their "illegal actions" removed all safeguards to fair and free elections and a Title 3 Court's adjudicated decision stated such AS YOU CLAIM! Given you are so sure you have the truth, spread it around and let everyone else in on your vast knowledge of the electoral litigation which has transpired over the last month!

The case in the OP has nothing to do with other cases, of course you know that, but deflection seems to be all you have. STFU.

.

 

[Concerned American]

this coming from someone who can't point out how these states followed their own constitutional laws.

check mate son. tired of this ball of yarn in front of the kitty game with you. you failed miserably to state a single fact around the case, just spout shit and keep diverting.

as usual.

You're putting the cart in front of the horse. We can worry about the merits of the case after we demonstrate that the case is able to be brought at all.

And once again you simply can't say that these, states followed their own laws.

Pathetic.

The citizens that voted did...they followed the law.... and by super majority, they voted for Biden to be President.

They voted via the laws in front of them, which they were told was a legal way to vote, by State Supreme court's rulings in the suits in the courts.

Disenfranchising these citizen of their constitutional right to vote,

just aint gonna happen...

their legislature choosing electors of their own and not electors representing who their citizens in good faith voted for, is STEALING the election from them.

The democrat leadership of those states allowed for unconstitutional changes to be made to the voting laws. You need to take your concerns up with them.

Not really....these cases were mostly adjudicated...

Sorry, you are wrong, The SCOTUS has not ruled yet, that is why Kavanaugh, Kagan and Thomas are in those contested states.