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

[OKTexas]

There was no fraud that affected the results of the election.

The Texas etc lawsuit makes no mention of fraud?

Fraud is like what happened in Georgia, when witnesses were sent home due to a fake emergency
and then trays and trays of fresh new mail in ballots (the mail hidden under that table) were brought in to be filled in by remaining workers.
Stephen Crowder has an excellent video on the matter.

Which is a lie. No fraud happened in Georgia.

Sure it did, it just can't be proven without a signature audit on absentee ballots.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

It was signed by the Governor in October 2019. It was well before the election.

If you're talking about PA, it was done in violation of the State Constitution and would require a vote of the people to approve it.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Now the Democrats are fighting against the Right to Vote.

Who is fighting against the right to vote?

Texas is literally trying to get SCOTUS to take away the votes of everyone in these four states.

If they had followed their own State laws, their own Constitutions and the Federal Constitution, there wouldn't have been a suit.

.

 

[Coyote]

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.​

Just one more example of traitorous Republicans trying to overturn an election and install their candidate.

Wow, a moral condemnation from the poster girl for the party of election fraud and disenfranchisement. You'll excuse me if I don't cry myself to sleep at night for not having the good opinion of someone I wouldn't piss on if she were on fire.

With all due respect, I really wouldn't want you pissing on me, for any reason.

Now please feel free to get back to your non-stop marathon attempt to overturn a legitimate and legal election solely because your guy lost. Republican Refraudlican.

 

[JimBowie1958]

They'll weasel out, I think.

I dont know, the SCOTUS justices have skin in this one, with the threats to expand the SCOTUS bench, so I think they are wanting to take action, but afraid of accusations of being partisan, etc, especially from within the SCOTUS.

I suspect that that they will toss the election results and declare no one won and send it to the House, or tell the state Houses to pick their own slate of delegates,, and many of these GOP snails will be willing to support Biden, so it isnt the same thing as just giving Trump the election by ruling out millions of mail-in while keeping the Trump in person votes.

I think they will punt to anyone that they think they can get it too and also make them look nonpartisan.

But My SCOTUS tea leaf reading has never been all that good.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

What you have said here is untrue.

No, it's true. It didn't go through state legislatures.

These states followed the relevent laws in their state.

That's a lie, GA required ID from some voters, not from others. In PA some counties allowed voters to cure defective ballots and not in others. Both violates the States and federal due process clauses and State election laws.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The Texas matter has no litigated findings on which to rely.

"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!)

Actually there is, Bush v. Gore is one precedent that said votes within a State can not be treated differently. GA treated mail in ballots differently than in person voting. Some counties in PA allowed voters to fix their defective ballots, while others didn't. That's just two of the due process arguments being made by TX.

.

There is a huge difference. Voters who vote in person can seek assistance in voting. That may not be ne cessarily true with mail in ballots. No equal protection case here.

Yeah, ok skippy. The supremes disagreed in Bush v. Gore.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Well hi, Poser! I see your dumb ass is still Trolling me again over your stupid ploy I didn't fall for. You're the fucking dumbass who posted your DD 214 as a challenge to prove you heap big brave warrior & so you could display like a fucking peacock, an award you received. That is the epitome of a poser and just one of many reasons why I use that moniker to peg your dumb ass for so long. All along I refused to display my DD 214, and instead posted my VA Benefits letter as proof of MY SEA/Nam deployments as agreed. And your dumb ass dismissed that as non-proof because it wasn't a DD 214...fucking bullshitter!

As far as the single item on topic, ALL of the cases have a common thread, notwithstanding your bullshit of trying to decouple them, one from another; Trump & Co. trying to put their collective thumbs on the scale. Tough shit Tex...you don't want to see it because you're just a fucking puppet. So piss off now Lil' Tex. You're the one making a fool of himself with your childish behavior in your 70's. TaTa Poser!

Well punk, first of all I'm not in my 70s and there in nothing in the TX suit that alleges any fraud. It simply points out States not following their own State laws, violations of due process and violations of the Constitution.

If you didn't spend so much time lying and deflecting you might be able to keep up. LMAO

.

They are providing no evidence. This is a rehash of the same arguments that have been thrown out in state and federal courts.

To put it quite simply, you're full of shit, just like your comrade.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

Well hi, Poser! I see your dumb ass is still Trolling me again over your stupid ploy I didn't fall for. You're the fucking dumbass who posted your DD 214 as a challenge to prove you heap big brave warrior & so you could display like a fucking peacock, an award you received. That is the epitome of a poser and just one of many reasons why I use that moniker to peg your dumb ass for so long. All along I refused to display my DD 214, and instead posted my VA Benefits letter as proof of MY SEA/Nam deployments as agreed. And your dumb ass dismissed that as non-proof because it wasn't a DD 214...fucking bullshitter!

As far as the single item on topic, ALL of the cases have a common thread, notwithstanding your bullshit of trying to decouple them, one from another; Trump & Co. trying to put their collective thumbs on the scale. Tough shit Tex...you don't want to see it because you're just a fucking puppet. So piss off now Lil' Tex. You're the one making a fool of himself with your childish behavior in your 70's. TaTa Poser!

Well punk, first of all I'm not in my 70s and there in nothing in the TX suit that alleges any fraud. It simply points out States not following their own State laws, violations of due process and violations of the Constitution.

If you didn't spend so much time lying and deflecting you might be able to keep up. LMAO

.

They are providing no evidence. This is a rehash of the same arguments that have been thrown out in state and federal courts.

Do you know the case they are presenting?

Evidently not.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The states are not hurt by how the other states run their elections. They have no standing.

Yes, they are. I sure as hell was hurt by fraud being used to get Biden elected.

You can apply equal protection when your state has been given affirmative action.

You have a state which gets 1.2 EC votes for every million citizens, arguing equal protection with a state which gets 1.8 EC votes for every million citizens.

Oh, spare us with the false equivalency bullshit. "We don't have to follow the law, because we don't have the pure mob rule democracy that we want!!!"

The operative part of the phrase "equal protection under the law" is actually "UNDER THE LAW". The law - in this case, the US Constitution - says that election laws are set by state legislatures. Not by the governor, not by the state Supreme Court, not by the Secretary of State. If a state's election was being governed by arbitrary decisions made by those other people, rather than by the laws passed by the state legislature, then that is a violation of the US Constitution.

And there's no amount of whining that "Well, the whole election is not fair, because it isn't done the way I think it should be!!!" that's going to change that fact, or be worth a taco fart in a wind tunnel to anyone here.

State legislatures include the Governor. The state Supreme Court has every right to interpret state constitutions. State officials also have the right to interpret laws. If that interpretation conflicts with the legislature then the legislature can pass a propos3ed law subject to approval of the Governor.

Poor little misinformed commie, the governor leads the executive branch, they are not part of the legislative branch. Did you fail civics of just not take it at all?

.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

This can't be serious. Texas has no standing to sue another state on that state's conduct under state law. Texas has no interest in another state's decision to send out ballot applications, nor any interest in whether those who received ballots in response to submitting the application returned those ballots, or how these ballots were handled once received. The pols who run the Texas government become more and more bizarre each day.

You're kidding right?

 

[OKTexas]

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.​

In the end, which of course you do not show, his lawsuit was rejected.

Well that's just a lie, the court is waiting on the ordered responses from the 4 States.

.

 

[OKTexas]

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. The tragedy and farce is that they are so many lemmings in other starters that followed corrupt Texas AG off the cliff.

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

Please show me where these 4 states did that.

All you gotta do.

Please show me a single case that Trump won on that argument.

All you gotta do.

Trump has nothing to do with it, deflection Dan.

Now show me where these states followed their process.

You can't, can you?

Huh???? Lawsuits were brought on this issue and Trump lost.

Ahiw me one case where Trump won.

You can’t, can you?

This is the Texas lawsuit. Keep up.

The Texas lawsuit is trash. It will dismissed out of hand.

Coming from a dipwad who's already proven that he knows nothing whatsoever about the Texas lawsuit, this means . . . exactly as much as every other post you make, which is nothing.

If Texas wins the case, will all states who made voting rules changes without their legislature doing it have their EC votes voided, or just the ones listed in the case?

I think this case would just cover the listed defendants, however any state that violated the constitution in this regard would be in jeopardy after the precedent was set.

Texas extended early voting without any input from the legislature. There goes those 38 EC votes for Trump down the drain. Changes were made the same way across the country.

That's a red herring as it pertains to in person voting. Nobody has challenged that, and many states did the same. This is about absentee ballots, verification (or lack thereof), and items that do not accommodate emergency measures like social distancing. Powers granted to governors are not granted to all executive branches such as election officials unless specified by the legislature or state Constitution.

Election officials can interpret the laws that are passed by the state just as federal agencies interpret laws passed by the federal government..

Sometimes it's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you an idiot, than open your mouth and prove it. Yet here you are proving yourself an idiot once again.

.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I asked...Do you know the case they are presenting?
You responded...No.
Now go look up the case they are presenting; it should only take a few minutes.

lol, ahhhh, that is so adorable!

You seem to expect them to actually do that, but I think we both know better.

The use of facts and reason to the libtards is like garlic and crosses to a vampire.

 

[Pogo]

They'll weasel out, I think.

I dont know, the SCOTUS justices have skin in this one, with the threats to expand the SCOTUS bench, so I think they are wanting to take action, but afraid of accusations of being partisan, etc, especially from within the SCOTUS.

I suspect that that they will toss the election results and declare no one won and send it to the House, or tell the state Houses to pick their own slate of delegates,, and many of these GOP snails will be willing to support Biden, so it isnt the same thing as just giving Trump the election by ruling out millions of mail-in while keeping the Trump in person votes.

I think they will punt to anyone that they think they can get it too and also make them look nonpartisan.

But My SCOTUS tea leaf reading has never been all that good.

And it's even WORSE here. What a crock you just wrote. NO Virginia, the SCOTUS will NOT "toss the election results" as they have no jurisdiction to do so. let alone the rest of your psychotic wet dream.

I thought I just posted this but it must have been the other thread on the same thing --- the COTUS Article II says the states shall appoint their Electors "in such Manner as the Legislatures thereof may direct". THAT is what state legislatures do, and it's already done. That is, that each state holds a popular election and then allocates its Electors based on that.

THAT'S IT. That' what the legislature does, and it got done a long time ago. Constitution is fulfilled right there.

NOW, if you can find us a state that is defying that procedure, like, say, a state that's ignoring its popular vote of a month ago and picking its Electors not on the vote totals but on, say, incessant begging phone calls from a petulant man-child in the White House crying his eyes out because he's a loser, *THEN* you begin to have a case of not following the COTUS.

 

[OKTexas]

The states are not hurt by how the other states run their elections. They have no standing.

Yes, they are. I sure as hell was hurt by fraud being used to get Biden elected.

You can apply equal protection when your state has been given affirmative action.

You have a state which gets 1.2 EC votes for every million citizens, arguing equal protection with a state which gets 1.8 EC votes for every million citizens.

Oh, spare us with the false equivalency bullshit. "We don't have to follow the law, because we don't have the pure mob rule democracy that we want!!!"

The operative part of the phrase "equal protection under the law" is actually "UNDER THE LAW". The law - in this case, the US Constitution - says that election laws are set by state legislatures. Not by the governor, not by the state Supreme Court, not by the Secretary of State. If a state's election was being governed by arbitrary decisions made by those other people, rather than by the laws passed by the state legislature, then that is a violation of the US Constitution.

And there's no amount of whining that "Well, the whole election is not fair, because it isn't done the way I think it should be!!!" that's going to change that fact, or be worth a taco fart in a wind tunnel to anyone here.

State legislatures include the Governor. The state Supreme Court has every right to interpret state constitutions. State officials also have the right to interpret laws. If that interpretation conflicts with the legislature then the legislature can pass a propos3ed law subject to approval of the Governor.

No, they don't, no more than the US Congress includes the President. The state Supreme Court has the job of APPLYING the state Constitution. Do not give me this leftist "I really hope you fall for it" bullshit about "they were just interpreting the law when they decided that the deadline was three days later." There's no interpretation involved in fucking numbers.

You have no clue what is in the Pennsylvania state constitution.

Poor commie, it's online, you can read it for yourself.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The Blue and Red States are 99% hillbillys.

And that is a GOOD thing, trust me.

All the sophisticated people I know want to live with the hillbillys when they retire.

Or, with each other as they slowly shift States Blue.

Ask Texas, Georgia and Arizona.

That's what happens when Liberals are afraid of the Blue War Zone they created and they flee to Safe States.
Of course, these Liberals are still Mentally Ill and turn the Safe State into yet another Blue War Zone.

Or they sell their homes from States with high property values for tons of money and move to States with low property values and live large.

Its a similar situation for ex-pats moving to say, Mexico.

Yeah, that's why Elan Musk told CA to pound sand and moved to TX, yep, must be. LMAO

.

 

[bripat9643]

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 38 - MILITARY, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, AND VETERANS AFFAIRS :: CHAPTER 3 - EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT :: ARTICLE 3 - EMERGENCY POWERS :: PART 1 - GOVERNOR :: § 38-3-51 - Emergency powers of Governor; termination of emergency;

law.justia.com

ARTICLE 3 - EMERGENCY POWERS
PART 1 - GOVERNOR
§ 38-3-51 - Emergency powers of Governor

(4) To perform and exercise such other functions, powers, and duties as may be deemed necessary to promote and secure the safety and protection of the civilian population.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; ​

Where does it say anything about the governor?

To perform and exercise such other functions, powers, and duties as may be deemed necessary to promote and secure the safety and protection of the civilian population.

Sounds like such things as expanding early voting to promote social distancing.

What part of "states legislatures can't delegate powers granted to them by the Constitution" didn't you understand?

 

[Skylar]

The Blue and Red States are 99% hillbillys.

And that is a GOOD thing, trust me.

All the sophisticated people I know want to live with the hillbillys when they retire.

Or, with each other as they slowly shift States Blue.

Ask Texas, Georgia and Arizona.

That's what happens when Liberals are afraid of the Blue War Zone they created and they flee to Safe States.
Of course, these Liberals are still Mentally Ill and turn the Safe State into yet another Blue War Zone.

Or they sell their homes from States with high property values for tons of money and move to States with low property values and live large.

Its a similar situation for ex-pats moving to say, Mexico.

Yeah, that's why Elan Musk told CA to pound sand and moved to TX, yep, must be. LMAO

.

Elon Musk isn't who is turning Arizona, Georgia and Texas blue.

 

[Skylar]

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.

What you have said here is untrue.

No, it's true. It didn't go through state legislatures.

These states followed the relevent laws in their state.

That's a lie, GA required ID from some voters, not from others. In PA some counties allowed voters to cure defective ballots and not in others. Both violates the States and federal due process clauses and State election laws.

.

The PA curing issue was already adjudicated by the federal courts and found to be perfectly legal. Appeals to the Supreme Court have never received cert.