God Bless Texas – State AG Files Direct 2020 Election Challenge Lawsuit With Supreme

Sunsettommy · #1 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 12:52 AM

Finally a strategy that has a chance of succeeding, SCOTUS has already accepted the lawsuit and requested responses from the sued states by Thursday 3 pm

The Last Refuge

God Bless Texas – State AG Files Direct 2020 Election Challenge Lawsuit With Supreme Court

Posted on December 8, 2020 by Sundance

Excerpt:

There are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by another state is one of those instances.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit [pdf here] with the supreme court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”

LINK

saltwn · #2 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunsettommy

Finally a strategy that has a chance of succeeding, SCOTUS has already accepted the lawsuit and requested responses from the sued states by Thursday 3 pm

The Last Refuge

God Bless Texas – State AG Files Direct 2020 Election Challenge Lawsuit With Supreme Court

Posted on December 8, 2020 by Sundance

Excerpt:

There are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by another state is one of those instances.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit [pdf here] with the supreme court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”

LINK

Sore loser Republicants strike again.

Sunsettommy · #3 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn

Sore loser Republicants strike again.

You really need to think about this one since it is a shift in strategy to constitutional grounds.

Go read the enclosed PDF link.

Here is a well written comment from another forum

Quote:

The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.

If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..

It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..

SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..

This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..

Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..

It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.

The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again."

=====

I agree here because the Penn Supreme Court screwed up on it since the legislature never passed a law for the changes.

cnredd · #4 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Texas State AG Files Direct 2020 Election Challenge Lawsuit With Supreme Court

Other states are jumping on the Texas bandwagon...

Alabama and Louisiana AGs Make Statements in Support of Texas, and Newsmax Reports 6 Other States Join Texas Suit in Supreme Court

Quote:

We reported earlier today that Texas has filed a lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin for 14th amendment equal protection violations. Since then, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case. Many in Fake News are pouncing on the fact that the High Court threw out the Pennsylvania lawsuit, but they don’t tell you that the Court did not hear that case, because the Texas suit includes Pennsylvania.

The Louisiana Attorney General has written a statement late Tuesday afternoon supporting Texas in their lawsuit for Equal Protection violations. They have supported the lawsuit, because they too argue that Democrats in their state violated the Equal Protection Clause, or Article II, Section 3 which states:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors”

Sunsettommy · #5 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 01:49 AM

The lawsuit is listed as filed and orders already sent to the sued states for quick response:

The Supreme Court of the United States

LINK

saltwn · #6 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunsettommy

The lawsuit is listed as filed and orders already sent to the sued states for quick response:

The Supreme Court of the United States

LINK

In light of the many failures filed by the Trump administration and its allies https://www.npr.org/2020/12/08/94423...ection-results
I doubt very seriously this lawsuit will be seen to have any merit.
These suits are not filed n a vacuum. Sometimes they even are reviewed by the same judges. It is well acknowledged by Alito and others that these are transparent attempts to overthrow the election with frivolity and dishonest claims.

Sunsettommy · #7 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn

In light of the many failures filed by the Trump administration and its allies https://www.npr.org/2020/12/08/94423...ection-results
I doubt very seriously this lawsuit will be seen to have any merit.
These suits are not filed n a vacuum. Sometimes they even are reviewed by the same judges. It is well acknowledged by Alito and others that these are transparent attempts to overthrow the election with frivolity and dishonest claims.

Understand your viewpoint, but this one is different because it about election law violations, based on state constitutions.

Most lawsuits were about election fraud complaints, which SCOTUS can do little about.

Constant_Slothrop · #8 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 07:47 AM

It has not been accepted by the Supreme Court (and it won’t be). This has no chance whatsoever. Trump and his supporters need to get on with their lives and accept the fact that Trump won.

GetAClue · #9 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Constant_Slothrop

It has not been accepted by the Supreme Court (and it won’t be). This has no chance whatsoever. Trump and his supporters need to get on with their lives and accept the fact that Trump won.

I have gone on with my life and have accepted the fact that Trump did win when only legal votes are counted.

Constant_Slothrop · #10 (**permalink**) 12-09-2020, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GetAClue

I have gone on with my life and have accepted the fact that Trump did win when only legal votes are counted.

Ah, that’s an embarrassing mistake. The broader point stands. This Supreme Court is not going to consider this Texas law suit.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to GetAClue For This Useful Post:
AZRWinger