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

[The Original Tree]

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.

Wut?? What US constitutional provisions were violated?

Equal Protection Under The Law

 

[justinacolmena]

SCOTUS is a dead institution of legalistic academia.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 11:47-48 - King James Version

Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[JimBowie1958]

right or wrong, this is a valid way to address your concerns of our system. given other methods i've seen taking place, i far prefer the court method and am fine with allowing time w/o demonizing those pursuing this option we all have available to us.

Given what judges have said, and how Guiliani had to back down from claiming fraud, it is beginning to look like it is.

Giuliani has not backed down from anything, girly girl.

 

[justinacolmena]

girly girl.

Just another Democrat asshole raping women and patronizing prostitutes all the way to the pimps and prosecutors of the Supreme Court.

 

[BULLDOG]

Texas claims the changes in the way the defendant states conducted the election did not come from those states legislatures. Isn't that the same thing as Texas Governor Abbot extending early voting without the state legislature?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Just another Democrat asshole raping women and patronizing prostitutes all the way to the pimps and prosecutors of the Supreme Court.

From JFK to Inoye to Swallowell, the Dimocraps have always been OK with rape if one of their own did it, unless they just want to get rid of them.

In the latter case it is as if their own guy is a Republican, lol.

 

[iceberg]

right or wrong, this is a valid way to address your concerns of our system. given other methods i've seen taking place, i far prefer the court method and am fine with allowing time w/o demonizing those pursuing this option we all have available to us.

Given what judges have said, and how Guiliani had to back down from claiming fraud, it is beginning to look like it is.

Giuliani has not backed down from anything, girly girl.

well maybe cheap hair dye.

 

[iceberg]

Texas claims the changes in the way the defendant states conducted the election did not come from those states legislatures. Isn't that the same thing as Texas Governor Abbot extending early voting without the state legislature?

maybe.

file a case and take them to court.

 

[iceberg]

Way back in 2016, I used to illustrate the idiocy of Trump bleevers by posting pictures of the pied piper leading the children to the cave.

Man oh man, is that just as apt today as it was then!

Wow, what a brilliant idea! No one ever thought of characterizing the supporters of a particular politician as brainwashed morons!

next think you know, he'll be stealing my fart jokes.

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

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.​

You guys are being made into such stooges.....I'm even embarrassed FOR you.

BTW, the Texas AG who is bringing this ludicrous lawsuit to SCOTUS is also being investigated by the FBI.

FBI is investigating Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, AP report says

The bureau is probing allegations that Paxton broke the law by using the attorney general's office to serve the interests of a political donor, two unnamed sources told the Associated Press.

www.texastribune.org

Legal experts everywhere are saying this lawsuit is "absurd" and "laughable".
"
A filing at the high court like Paxton’s would usually be made by the solicitor general of Texas, Kyle Hawkins, the state’s top appellate lawyer, and not the state’s attorney general, but Hawkins did not sign on.

The reason for that is unclear, “but it’s possible it’s because he didn’t want to put his name on a legal filing that’s little more than a press release,” said Justin Levitt, a professor of election law at Loyola Law School in California.""""

Analysis-Texas tries to overturn the U.S. election result. Can it succeed?

An extraordinary attempt by the state of Texas to have President Donald Trump's election loss upended by the U.S. Supreme Court is almost certain to fail, according to election law experts who called the lawsuit "absurd" and "laughable."

www.reuters.com

 

[JimBowie1958]

well maybe cheap hair dye.

What the hell was he thinking? I am wondering if he used some cheap hair dye the hotel gave hiom and he just sweated it off, or if he planned it to get more media coverage for his announcement?

 

[iceberg]

well maybe cheap hair dye.

What the hell was he thinking? I am wondering if he used some cheap hair dye the hotel gave hiom and he just sweated it off, or if he planned it to get more media coverage for his announcement?

dunno man, but funny is funny. he deserves some shots on that one.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Those four states didn't follow the law in their state. The change in ballot approvals, per law in each of those states, was supposed to go through the state legislature. That didn't happen.

Yes they did. Your saying so does not make it true.

The same can be said for your saying, "Yes, they DID follow the law, they DID they DID THEY DID!!"

The difference, of course, is that what Lord is saying can be backed up by the actual laws, and what you're saying is only backed up by your emotions.

Thanks, Cecilie. I don't even think they can comprehend it. They're engulfed with emotions and feelings, no rationale, logic or substance.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The same can be said for your saying, "Yes, they DID follow the law, they DID they DID THEY DID!!"
The difference, of course, is that what Lord is saying can be backed up by the actual laws, and what you're saying is only backed up by your emotions.

Thanks, Cecilie. I don't even think they can comprehend it. They're engulfed with emotions and feelings, no rationale, logic or substance.

In other words, their normal level of insanity or dishonesty.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The same can be said for your saying, "Yes, they DID follow the law, they DID they DID THEY DID!!"
The difference, of course, is that what Lord is saying can be backed up by the actual laws, and what you're saying is only backed up by your emotions.

Thanks, Cecilie. I don't even think they can comprehend it. They're engulfed with emotions and feelings, no rationale, logic or substance.

In other words, their normal level of insanity or dishonesty.

Yep, that's it for them.

 

[mascale]

Bush V. Gore, if that is a precedent--was famously about the act of ballot counting. The problems were after the fact of the election. There are lawful different methods of voting in all jurisdictions. If those have basis in restrictive, abridgement, or denial of voting: That could be said to have basis in a local court challenge. Bush V. Gore was nowhere near the Texas Intervention. Even Tennessee did not sue Florida. So secondly, that matter was appellate in nature. The Texas interstate intervention is not appellate in nature. Not clearly shown is how the rules of local jurisprudence were improperly applied, even. 50 or more cases tossed-out are not evidence of an interstate need for Supreme Court intervention--based in one or more state's--therefore political requests. There are no civil liberties problems in litigated evidence to remedy. Texas has no omniscience in the local wards and precinct matters. So anything else likely requires the litigated evidence for some basis on which the Supreme Court can rely. Differences in adjustments for local voting obstacles--Covid-19 an example: Are not restrictive, abridgement or denial of voting rights: Prima Facie.

What else is there to post?

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(For a real sniff of foreign intervention: See Deut 23: 19-20, about the gouging and screwing that Moses likely learned as kid--from Acts 7 a household art and skill of Pharaoh!)

 

[Cecilie1200]

This lawsuit brought by the corrupt Texas AG is a farce. It is an embarrassment to the legal system of the United States of America. The Supreme Court will rid themselves of this trash lawsuit faster than Trump runs away from a book.

These states broke their own laws.

Are denying the states did not follow their constitutional process?

Lol...the states did not violate their “own laws.” The corrupt Texas AG’s lawsuit is a rehash of all the prior cases that have been laughed out of court, and further, the suit is nothing less than an attempt to repudiate the votes of millions. The tragedy and farce is that they are so many lemmings in other states that have followed the corrupt Texas AG off the cliff.

"I didn't bother to read the articles about this lawsuit, because I'm just SURE this is what it says, and I was in a hurry to tell everyone how stupid the lawsuit was on the basis of what I have decided it's about."

In much the same manner, I didn't bother to read your post past the first half of your first sentence, because I am sure that it's erroneous garbage with no relation to the actual topic.

 

[BULLDOG]

Those four states didn't follow the law in their state. The change in ballot approvals, per law in each of those states, was supposed to go through the state legislature. That didn't happen.

Texas extended early voting dates without going through the legislature. Should Texas' 38 electoral votes be excluded from the count too?

 

[BULLDOG]

Texas claims the changes in the way the defendant states conducted the election did not come from those states legislatures. Isn't that the same thing as Texas Governor Abbot extending early voting without the state legislature?

maybe.

file a case and take them to court.

No need. Texas filed the case already. If Paxton wins, his own state will be subject to the ruling.

 

[Cellblock2429]

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.

If they have been found to have NOT committed Fraud, what crime do you have evidence to prove your opinion?

We all know, even you, that Donald Trump is a pathological liar. His word is not worth a confederate dollar.

Pathological liar: Pathological Liar: How to Cope with Someone’s Compulsive Lies

/——/ “ His word is not worth a confederate dollar.”
BTW, a confederate dollar is worth $275 while a US dollar is worth a dollar.

https://www.etsy.com/listing/481270038/vintage-obsolete-currency-rare-civil-war?gpla=1&gao=1&&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping_us_all&utm_custom1=_k_45a71acc4fec11bfc59c451d6769f8e1_k_&utm_content=bing_319339185_1304020917004184_81501327774781_pla-4585100928622219:pla-4585100928622219_m__481270038&utm_custom2=319339185&msclkid=45a71acc4fec11bfc59c451d6769f8e1