Texas asks U.S. Supreme Court to help Trump upend election in long-shot lawsuit

[webfact]

Texas asks U.S. Supreme Court to help Trump upend election in long-shot lawsuit

By Makini Brice

 

FILE PHOTO: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton addresses reporters on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court after the court took up a major abortion case focusing on whether a Texas law that imposes strict regulations on abortion doctors and clinic buildings interferes with the constitutional right of a woman to end her pregnancy in Washington March 2, 2016. At right is Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The state of Texas on Tuesday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the voting results in four other states in a long-shot legal gambit intended to help President Donald Trump upend his election loss to President-elect Joe Biden.

 

Officials from the four states - Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin - called the lawsuit a reckless attack on American democracy while legal experts gave it little chance to succeed. The case was filed directly with the Supreme Court rather than with a lower court, as is permitted for certain litigation between states.

 

The lawsuit, announced by the Republican attorney general of Texas Ken Paxton, targeted election battleground states that Trump lost to Biden after winning them in 2016. The Republican president has falsely claimed that he won re-election and has made baseless allegations of widespread voting fraud.

 

Paul Smith, a professor and election law expert at Georgetown University's law school, said Texas did not have a legitimate basis for the suit.

 

"There is no possible way that the state of Texas has standing to complain about how other states counted the votes and how they are about to cast their electoral votes," Smith said.

 

The case represents the latest in a series of lawsuits by Trump's campaign and his supporters intended to reverse the Republican president's loss to Democrat Biden in the Nov. 3 election. Those efforts have so far failed.

 

The lawsuit argued that changes made by the four states to voting procedures amid the coronavirus pandemic to expand mail-in voting were unlawful. Texas makes the remarkable request of the Supreme Court to immediately block the four states from using the voting results to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College, essentially erasing the will of the voters.

 

Biden has amassed 306 electoral votes - exceeding the necessary 270 - compared to 232 for Trump in the state-by-state Electoral College that determines the election's outcome, while also winning the national popular vote by more than 7 million votes. The four states contribute a combined 62 electoral votes to Biden's total.

 

Electors in the Electoral College typically are party loyalists who have pledged to vote for the candidate who wins a state's popular vote. Texas wants the legislatures in the four states to appoint their own slate of electors instead of relying upon the verdict delivered by voters.

 

Texas also asked the Supreme Court to delay the Dec. 14 date for Electoral College votes to be cast. That date was set by law in 1887.

 

Democrats and other critics have accused Trump of aiming to reduce public confidence in U.S. election integrity and undermine democracy by trying to subvert the will of the voters.

 

"The erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn't attributable to the good people of Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia or Pennsylvania but rather to partisan officials, like Mr. Paxton, who place loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country," Michigan's Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel said.

 

Paxton, an ally of Trump on a range of issues, faces allegations in Texas of bribery and abuse of his office to benefit a political donor, according to local media.

 

A CONSERVATIVE COURT MAJORITY

The Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices named by Trump. The president said before the election he expected the Supreme Court to decide the winner.

 

The justices are not obligated to hear the case. The court has made clear that its "original jurisdiction," which lets it directly hear litigation between states, should be invoked sparingly.

 

Texas accused election officials in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin of failing to protect mail-in voting from fraud, diminishing "the weight of votes cast in states that lawfully abide by the election structure set forth in the Constitution."

 

Voting by mail surged during the pandemic, as many Americans stayed away from polling places to avoid the spread of COVID-19. State officials have said they have found no evidence of the widespread election fraud alleged by Trump.

 

Election disputes are meant to be resolved by members of Congress when they meet on Jan. 6 to formally count Electoral College votes, constitutional law professor Ned Foley of Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law said.

 

"I would think the court would not want to be dragged into the middle of this," Foley added.

 

Trump retweeted several Twitter posts expressing support for the lawsuit, including two that called for other states to join it.

 

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, said, "These continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless." Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, called the lawsuit "genuinely embarrassing" and an "attack on our democracy."

 

A spokeswoman for Georgia's attorney general's office said: "With all due respect, the Texas Attorney General is constitutionally, legally and factually wrong about Georgia." Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr is a Republican.

 

Tuesday represents a "safe harbor" early deadline under the law for states to certify the election results.

 

(Reporting by Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-12-09

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Tug]

Ain’t gonna fly imo don’t think the Supreme Court is up for a coup a tad bit illegal perhaps treasonous as well they allready threw out the attempt in Pennsylvania trumps toast just hope he doesent get more of us killed on the way out

[simple1]

trump and his sycophants are a total disgrace to the principles of democracy trying to disenfranchise millions of US voters. Thank God trump will be removed from power 20/01/21, Another four years of the trump ideocracy had a real potential to be ruinous for the Western world's stability.

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by onthedarkside
off topic link removed

[Dagfinnur Traustason]

It´s high time to check if Trump is not spreading a more dangerous virus rhan Covid-19. Just take in the clowns in Texas for a couple of scientific experiments to find out.

Or maybe the whole state is infected with stupidity.

[Lacessit]

Obviously another corrupt Trump sycophant, perhaps Paxton wants a pardon in advance too. Or it's just to keep the campaign dollars rolling in from the suckers, most of the state legal challenges have been tossed out.

IMO the Law of Unintended Consequences may come into play, if the Supreme Court was to take sides in Trump's favor Biden would have every justification to stack it as Trump did. And create even more contempt for the law than there is now.

Roll on December 14, and January 20.

[soalbundy]

How deep is this hole supposed to go?

[bendejo]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-moves-up-pennsylvanias-response-date-on-emergency-application-to-day-before-safe-harbor-deadline

Quote

"The application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is denied," the order said.

 

I'm really impressed (I'm even quoting Fox!).  If there is anybody on the bench that would back up [Trump] it would be Alito (which counts a 2 votes, as Thomas would follow).  Then there's DT's 3 stooges who dare not dissent. 

I figure Roberts wouldn't buy into any of this shinola either.

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by onthedarkside
name calling reference removed

[J Town]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

The lawsuit argued that changes made by the four states to voting procedures amid the coronavirus pandemic to expand mail-in voting were unlawful.

These states HELPED people to vote safely. This lawsuit says that's wrong. How much more Republican could one be? Shameful!

[Kelsall]

It appears to be on the docket.

No. 22O155
Title:	Texas, Plaintiff v. Pennsylvania, et al.
Docketed:	December 8, 2020
Lower Ct:

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html

Edited December 9, 2020 by Kelsall

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Well if you remember over the last year Trump supporters repeatedly said that changing the law to allow the willy-nilly mail-out of millions of unrequested ballots would cause mayhem and chaos, for which we were mocked and called conspiracy theorists. So yes, Trump supporters were bang on the money, unless you are claiming this fiercely contested election was a roaring success. 

The only mayhem and chaos is that created by Trump and supporters. Their allegations of mayhem and chaos in the electoral have repeatedly been dismissed by courts on the grounds that they haven't presented only ludicrous evidence to support their claim.

[heybruce]

"The lawsuit argued that changes made by the four states to voting procedures amid the coronavirus pandemic to expand mail-in voting were unlawful."

 

That is bizarre.  The US Constitution gives the States the right to decide how to conduct elections, and it is perfectly reasonable and legal for states to change voting rules during a pandemic to make voting safer. 

 

These Texas politicians don't expect their case to go anywhere, they just want to signal to Trump's base that they are loyal to Trump.  I assume they fear primary challenges during the next election.

[J Town]

Just now, Kelsall said:

It's on the docket

No. 22O155
Title:	Texas, Plaintiff v. Pennsylvania, et al.
Docketed:	December 8, 2020
Lower Ct:

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html

So was the last SCOTUS case which got thrown out due to no evidence. About four dozen previous court cases have been thrown out as well due to no evidence. And how will THIS case be any difference (and you can't say new evidence, cuz there's NO evidence)?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Well if you remember over the last year Trump supporters repeatedly said that changing the law to allow the willy-nilly mail-out of millions of unrequested ballots would cause mayhem and chaos, for which we were mocked and called conspiracy theorists. So yes, Trump supporters were bang on the money, unless you are claiming this fiercely contested election was a roaring success. 

For that to be true you need to provide evidence of mayhem and chaos caused by mailing out ballots.

 

Tge only ‘mayhem and chaos’ is that created by Trump and his supporters with their groundless claims of fraud.

 

Where is the evidence?

[simple1]

39 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

When I read posts like this, I almost feel pity for you Trump fanboys. It is quite remarkable how out of touch with reality you guys are. I’m not a psychologist, so I would love to understand how grown adults can end up so desperately delusional. Is this some kind of coping mechanism—you keep pretending and hoping what you want to believe so you never have to came back to reality to face the devastating truth? 
 

It will be another brutal defeat for Donnie and his entourage of clowns. I’m sure you’ll jump onto the next straw to clutch on soon after. I like this idea: 

Trump Proposes Overruling Supreme Court by Creating Supremer Court

 

'

Cult members, they've just learnt from the troll in chief - trump. Just think about it - some trump supporters have voted into Congress QAnon, with trump's support, conspiracy promoters - how absurd is that in a literate, civilised society. The power of the 'big lie' is amazing...

[charmonman]

Texas should mind its own goddam business.

[Scott]

37 minutes ago, Salerno said:

 

Doubtful; more like an old one that is on a forced posting holiday 

And one who has been removed from the forum along with all the replies from members who replied.  

 

It's never a good idea to feed trolls.  

 

[mtls2005]

I thought trump won Texas?

 

#kidding

 

Anywho, SC not gonna be interested in this at all, unless religious freedoms can somehow be intertinwed.

 

All hat, no cattle.

[mtls2005]

Interesting that all the senate and congressional races won by Republicans are not subject to the same level of "scrutiny" as the top of the ticket. 

 

Why is that?

 

Asking for a 'friend'.

 

 

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

 

 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Paxton, an ally of Trump on a range of issues, faces allegations in Texas of bribery and abuse of his office to benefit a political donor, according to local media.

Ah huh...

[Jeffr2]

I sure hope this members of the GOP who are trying so hard to destroy our democracy pay for this in the future.  Time for this to end.  It's just becoming ridiculous.  Sad some actually fall for this stuff.

[Paul Henry]

I thought DREAMERS were children of immigrants but it seems they are really Republicans who follow in the footsteps of  their lord and master.

Edited December 9, 2020 by onthedarkside
name calling reference removed

[animalmagic]

So, let me get this straight.  For many months before the election 45 was claiming that mail in ballots would lead to widespread fraud.  Yet he, the chosen one, the stable genius, the man so intelligent he could remember five words, did absolutely nothing about it or even try to create a completely infallible system?

I mean, it's not like he was busy fighting a pandemic or something.

[Jeffr2]

2 minutes ago, animalmagic said:

So, let me get this straight.  For many months before the election 45 was claiming that mail in ballots would lead to widespread fraud.  Yet he, the chosen one, the stable genius, the man so intelligent he could remember five words, did absolutely nothing about it or even try to create a completely infallible system?

I mean, it's not like he was busy fighting a pandemic or something.

He and his family vote by mail.  It's all a big fraud.  Trump and his cult members.  Sad many of them don't even know it!

 

Trump and his enablers are doing more damage to our democracy than any other time in modern history.  We won't forget.

[bendejo]

7 minutes ago, animalmagic said:

So, let me get this straight.  For many months before the election 45 was claiming that mail in ballots would lead to widespread fraud.  Yet he, the chosen one, the stable genius, the man so intelligent he could remember five words, did absolutely nothing about it or even try to create a completely infallible system?

I mean, it's not like he was busy fighting a pandemic or something.

Give that man a cee-gar!

 

Quote

After complaining for months that he would be cheated, it appears the Trump campaign did little — if anything — to guard against vote theft. Not only that, they were woefully unprepared to seek legal redress once Election Day passed.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/528443-choking-not-cheating-was-trumps-undoing

 

 

[Jeffr2]

Shame on Trump.  Shame on his followers for supporting this.  Calling the US a third world country?  He's a traitor and should be tried.  Beyond insane.  Stunning some actually fall for these lies.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/12/07/donald-trump-legal-efforts-2020-post-election-collins-pkg-lead-vpx.cnn

[Walker88]

repubs don't seem to understand the United States nor the Constitution. First, repubs in TX seem to not have studied the long ago battles about States Rights, as they are now trying to bully other States into doing the bidding of TX repubs. It's an incredibly silly filing, though it should elicit some giggles inside the Supreme Court.

 

repubs also seem confused about what document forms the basis of govt in the US. For some reason, repubs are stuck in 1215, thinking the US is ruled by the Magna Carta, where all are equal under the law except the monarch, who is the law. The Founders, had they so chose, could have used the Magna Carta when forming the US, but instead Jefferson and Madison took the time to devise a document and a system where everyone is equal under the law and subject to it. It was only some 200 years later that some disputed ruling from the OLC decided the Founders meant a sitting POTUS could not be indicted. That is likely to change and total equality of all be codified under the new Administration.

 

What remains of the Party of Lincoln, which is a rotting carcasse of anything decent that Party ever had, now seems to be the Party of non-democracy, where 'heads I win, tails you lose', where fascism reins supreme, where allies are now enemies and enemies friends, where deficits only matter if the other side is in power, and where truth is whatever they need it to be. Ideally a new and better  conservative Party will rise from the ashes and create the two Party give-and-take that can meet somewhere in the middle and continue building the democracy all should embrace, but which the current R-in-name-only Party does not embrace.

[Stargeezr]

What will Trump be remembered by in the future. Swamp Drainer. Wall Guy,  Covid Denier.  Maybe he will not be remembered at all.  It will be a nice day, when he is only seen on a few golf courses.

Geezer

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, J Town said:

So was the last SCOTUS case which got thrown out due to no evidence. About four dozen previous court cases have been thrown out as well due to no evidence. And how will THIS case be any difference (and you can't say new evidence, cuz there's NO evidence)?

Powell's SCOTUS cases weren't thrown out for lack of evidence.  In each of Powell's cases the dismissal was based on jurisdiction and pleading standards.  I doubt if most people here know the particulars of each and every case thus far filed and lost but they'll be sure to claim "no evidence" for every one of them and care not whether it's true or not.  Are you folks afraid of evidence of fraud?

[Walker88]

"Spurious" is the perfect word to describe these ongoing assaults on democracy as evidence in this silly TX R filing.

 

The drivel dragged up repeatedly since 3 Nov is that there are 'anomalies' in the way in which counted votes were added to the running tallies.  Nonsense.  Here are the facts:

 

These so-called anomalies are the direct result of pre-election actions by repub lawmakers.  Many States were prohibited from counting mail-in votes until the day of the election. Thus, what happened is that States election commissions tabulated first all the Election Day votes and set up the running tally. After the majority of Election Day votes were counted and tallied, only then were mail-in ballots opened and counted.

 

Because Democrats believed in the dangers of Covid, far more Dems chose to vote by mail (note that 45 his family, his AG and several other members of his Administration voted by mail). Thus, when those ballots were opened, it was no surprise that they tended heavily toward Biden. They were counted in batches, depending on the area they were sent, and then entered all at once into the running vote tally. Therefore, it is no surprise to anyone who dares to actually try to understand how the system worked that there would be large instant increases in the vote tally for Biden.

 

A cynic would guess that when the repubs set up the rules that prohibited counting mail-in ballots until Election Day, they knew full well how the votes would appear in the running tally, and they planned beforehand to raise doubts about something that the system they set up would cause to occur. They could then bark about 'one in ten trillion chance', when in fact it was both logical and expected.

 

[J Town]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Powell's SCOTUS cases weren't thrown out for lack of evidence.  In each of Powell's cases the dismissal was based on jurisdiction and pleading standards.  I doubt if most people here know the particulars of each and every case thus far filed and lost but they'll be sure to claim "no evidence" for every one of them and care not whether it's true or not.  Are you folks afraid of evidence of fraud?

Standards be damned, if there was no evidence there was no case. That's in EVERY court case, it's the very core of a court decision - they're based on evidence. To say otherwise is specious and delusional.