5 big problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

[DrLove]

I'll add one of my own to Pete Williams' analysis. If successful, a Democrat AG could respond by cobbling together blue states in a lawsuit to discard a few states that Trump won starting with Texas and Florida. After all, they changed their election laws in response to the pandemic too. SCOTUS knows this, and that's a big reason they won't take the case.

To cite a glaring one, the lawsuit, which Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed Monday, calls on the court to delay the electoral vote in the four targeted states, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, to allow investigations of voting issues to continue. That would be unconstitutional, said Edward Foley of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University. He points out that Article II, Section 4, says that Congress can choose the day the electors meet to vote but that it also says the day "shall be the same throughout the United States." This year, it's Dec. 14, five days from now.​

​

The second hurdle is that Texas has no legal right to claim that officials elsewhere didn't follow the rules set by their own legislatures. The United States doesn't have a national election for president. It has a series of state elections, and one state has no legal standing to challenge how another state conducts its elections any more than Texas could challenge how Georgia elects its senators, legal experts said.​

​

Officials from both parties in the states named in the lawsuit ripped Paxton's challenge as "a publicity stunt" loaded with "false and irresponsible" allegations.​

​

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court for an order invalidating something like 20 million votes, which Foley said is unthinkable.​

​

The court filings also appear to have been prepared in haste. For example, the lawsuit says the four states that Texas wants to sue have a total of 72 electoral votes. The total is actually 62.​

​

"This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court. "And in any event, the justices will think that this case, like the others, should be brought first in the lower courts and not just in front of them first."​

​

While it's true that the Supreme Court is the place to go when one state wants to sue another, it has to get permission from the court first, and it has to show there's no other place to resolve the issues. The Texas lawsuit is a compilation of legal claims that have already been chewed over in lower courts.​

​

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.​

5 glaring problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

"This case is hopeless," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, who argues frequently before the court.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[jillian]

The suit it’s insane. And they are treasonous disgusting animals

 

[rightwinger]

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.

Somebody is fishing for a pardon

 

[laferia52]

I'll add one of my own to Pete Williams' analysis. If successful, a Democrat AG could respond by cobbling together blue states in a lawsuit to discard a few states that Trump won starting with Texas and Florida. After all, they changed their election laws in response to the pandemic too. SCOTUS knows this, and that's a big reason they won't take the case.

To cite a glaring one, the lawsuit, which Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed Monday, calls on the court to delay the electoral vote in the four targeted states, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, to allow investigations of voting issues to continue. That would be unconstitutional, said Edward Foley of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University. He points out that Article II, Section 4, says that Congress can choose the day the electors meet to vote but that it also says the day "shall be the same throughout the United States." This year, it's Dec. 14, five days from now.​

​

The second hurdle is that Texas has no legal right to claim that officials elsewhere didn't follow the rules set by their own legislatures. The United States doesn't have a national election for president. It has a series of state elections, and one state has no legal standing to challenge how another state conducts its elections any more than Texas could challenge how Georgia elects its senators, legal experts said.​

​

Officials from both parties in the states named in the lawsuit ripped Paxton's challenge as "a publicity stunt" loaded with "false and irresponsible" allegations.​

​

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court for an order invalidating something like 20 million votes, which Foley said is unthinkable.​

​

The court filings also appear to have been prepared in haste. For example, the lawsuit says the four states that Texas wants to sue have a total of 72 electoral votes. The total is actually 62.​

​

"This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court. "And in any event, the justices will think that this case, like the others, should be brought first in the lower courts and not just in front of them first."​

​

While it's true that the Supreme Court is the place to go when one state wants to sue another, it has to get permission from the court first, and it has to show there's no other place to resolve the issues. The Texas lawsuit is a compilation of legal claims that have already been chewed over in lower courts.​

​

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.​

5 glaring problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

"This case is hopeless," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, who argues frequently before the court.

www.nbcnews.com

Other states are suing too.Texas is not suing for them.

 

[Dogbiscuit]

I'll add one of my own to Pete Williams' analysis. If successful, a Democrat AG could respond by cobbling together blue states in a lawsuit to discard a few states that Trump won starting with Texas and Florida. After all, they changed their election laws in response to the pandemic too. SCOTUS knows this, and that's a big reason they won't take the case.

To cite a glaring one, the lawsuit, which Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed Monday, calls on the court to delay the electoral vote in the four targeted states, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, to allow investigations of voting issues to continue. That would be unconstitutional, said Edward Foley of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University. He points out that Article II, Section 4, says that Congress can choose the day the electors meet to vote but that it also says the day "shall be the same throughout the United States." This year, it's Dec. 14, five days from now.​

​

The second hurdle is that Texas has no legal right to claim that officials elsewhere didn't follow the rules set by their own legislatures. The United States doesn't have a national election for president. It has a series of state elections, and one state has no legal standing to challenge how another state conducts its elections any more than Texas could challenge how Georgia elects its senators, legal experts said.​

​

Officials from both parties in the states named in the lawsuit ripped Paxton's challenge as "a publicity stunt" loaded with "false and irresponsible" allegations.​

​

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court for an order invalidating something like 20 million votes, which Foley said is unthinkable.​

​

The court filings also appear to have been prepared in haste. For example, the lawsuit says the four states that Texas wants to sue have a total of 72 electoral votes. The total is actually 62.​

​

"This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court. "And in any event, the justices will think that this case, like the others, should be brought first in the lower courts and not just in front of them first."​

​

While it's true that the Supreme Court is the place to go when one state wants to sue another, it has to get permission from the court first, and it has to show there's no other place to resolve the issues. The Texas lawsuit is a compilation of legal claims that have already been chewed over in lower courts.​

​

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.​

5 glaring problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

"This case is hopeless," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, who argues frequently before the court.

www.nbcnews.com

Other states are suing too.Texas is not suing for them.

Be interesting to see how many more states want to send a message before the deadline today.

 

[colfax_m]

Other states are suing too.Texas is not suing for them.

They filed amicus briefs, so not exactly the same thing.

 

[DrLove]

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.

Somebody is fishing for a pardon

Yep, and he'll get it even if SCOTUS won't take the case. BTW, the attorney who signed the amicus brief is the Birther dude who questioned Kamala Harris' citizenship.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The suit it’s insane. And they are treasonous disgusting animals

How dare the court not allow Biden to steal the presidency!

The nerve of some people.

 

[rightwinger]

What Texas Republicans are asking SCOTUS to rule.

1. That states have a right to sue other states over how they conduct elections.

2. That voting by absentee ballot is unconstitutional

3. That the remedy for changing absentee rules is to disallow the votes of those who followed those rules.

4. That the ruling will be limited only to states that Trump lost, not states like Texas and Florida who also changed their rules.

 

[DrLove]

What Texas Republicans are asking SCOTUS to rule.

1. That states have a right to sue other states over how they conduct elections.

2. That voting by absentee ballot is unconstitutional

3. That the remedy for changing absentee rules is to disallow the votes of those who followed those rules.

4. That the ruling will be limited only to states that Trump lost, not states like Texas and Florida who also changed their rules.

You are a quick study Grasshopper.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

"This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court. "And in any event, the justices will think that this case, like the others, should be brought first in the lower courts and not just in front of them first."

Does Texas have the right to sue states that have disenfranchised voters in Texas, and elsewhere, because
they have changed their election laws to favor a partisan favorite? Of course.

Equal treatment under the law means fifty individual and fair elections for president so every state can
be sure their voters are being treated fairly and without favor that an illegal rigged election would give to some.

And the Supreme Court is the only proper forum when one state sues another. A lower court is out
of the question due to constitutional issues that will necessarily arise that only the SC can address.
This Goldstein guy is out of his partisan mind not unlike trolls here.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

What Texas Republicans are asking SCOTUS to rule.

1. That states have a right to sue other states over how they conduct elections.

Not true. This is about states that change election law improperly for partisan gain . The constitution says
only state legislatures can change state election law.

2. That voting by absentee ballot is unconstitutional

Wrong!

3. That the remedy for changing absentee rules is to disallow the votes of those who followed those rules.

Wrong. No remedy has been offered by the court yet.

4. That the ruling will be limited only to states that Trump lost, not states like Texas and Florida who also changed their rules.

Texas brought the suit against the states that illegally changed their election laws in order to gain
partisan advantage thus disenfranchising Texas voters and many many others.
If someone thinks they have a legitimate suit to file against Texas and Florida let them bring it.

 

[kyzr]

Never waste a good "Constitutional Crisis".
IMHO we all know that Justice Roberts is a closet democrat and a card-carrying Never-Trumper.
But it would be glorius to see Senator Cruz present arguments for Trump before the USSC, Ted's "populist" GOP creds would be golden for 2024 and beyond.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The states should ignore the illegitimate pervert, block everything he does and not recognize any of his illegal decrees.

 

[boilermaker55]

NO! What they are doing is sucking tRUMPS cock more.

What Texas Republicans are asking SCOTUS to rule.

1. That states have a right to sue other states over how they conduct elections.

2. That voting by absentee ballot is unconstitutional

3. That the remedy for changing absentee rules is to disallow the votes of those who followed those rules.

4. That the ruling will be limited only to states that Trump lost, not states like Texas and Florida who also changed their rules.

 

[BluesLegend]

It's fantastic that other states in the union are challenging the corruption in these Dem blue states that's a whopper of a SCOTUS case right there. Something the SCOTUS is likely to want to get in the middle of. Dems are shitting their pants.

 

[MaryAnne11]

What Texas Republicans are asking SCOTUS to rule.

1. That states have a right to sue other states over how they conduct elections.

2. That voting by absentee ballot is unconstitutional

3. That the remedy for changing absentee rules is to disallow the votes of those who followed those rules.

4. That the ruling will be limited only to states that Trump lost, not states like Texas and Florida who also changed their rules.

Charlie Dent just said if they can do that Democrats can file the same suit on states Trump won!

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I'll add one of my own to Pete Williams' analysis. If successful, a Democrat AG could respond by cobbling together blue states in a lawsuit to discard a few states that Trump won starting with Texas and Florida. After all, they changed their election laws in response to the pandemic too. SCOTUS knows this, and that's a big reason they won't take the case.

To cite a glaring one, the lawsuit, which Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed Monday, calls on the court to delay the electoral vote in the four targeted states, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, to allow investigations of voting issues to continue. That would be unconstitutional, said Edward Foley of the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University. He points out that Article II, Section 4, says that Congress can choose the day the electors meet to vote but that it also says the day "shall be the same throughout the United States." This year, it's Dec. 14, five days from now.​

​

The second hurdle is that Texas has no legal right to claim that officials elsewhere didn't follow the rules set by their own legislatures. The United States doesn't have a national election for president. It has a series of state elections, and one state has no legal standing to challenge how another state conducts its elections any more than Texas could challenge how Georgia elects its senators, legal experts said.​

​

Officials from both parties in the states named in the lawsuit ripped Paxton's challenge as "a publicity stunt" loaded with "false and irresponsible" allegations.​

​

The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court for an order invalidating something like 20 million votes, which Foley said is unthinkable.​

​

The court filings also appear to have been prepared in haste. For example, the lawsuit says the four states that Texas wants to sue have a total of 72 electoral votes. The total is actually 62.​

​

"This case is hopeless. Texas has no right to bring a lawsuit over election procedures in other states," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who argues frequently before the court. "And in any event, the justices will think that this case, like the others, should be brought first in the lower courts and not just in front of them first."​

​

While it's true that the Supreme Court is the place to go when one state wants to sue another, it has to get permission from the court first, and it has to show there's no other place to resolve the issues. The Texas lawsuit is a compilation of legal claims that have already been chewed over in lower courts.​

​

Paxton, whom the Trump campaign named a co-chair of its Lawyers for Trump group in July, has had legal problems of his own. He was indicted in 2015 on still-pending securities fraud charges and was reported to have been accused of other wrongdoing by his top aides this year.​

5 glaring problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court

"This case is hopeless," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, who argues frequently before the court.

www.nbcnews.com

Other states are suing too.Texas is not suing for them.

My the plethra of rookies these days~
Texas is suing..the others just added their names...to show solidarity...a political showcase move. Cynical and devoid of meaning.

 

[boilermaker55]

It is the tRUMPesters like you that have been shitting all over yourself for the past 4 yrs and
even more so now..
just like tRUMP These are the legal probes facing President Donald Trump when he leaves office - CNN Video

It's fantastic that other states in the union are challenging the corruption in these Dem blue states that's a whopper of a SCOTUS case right there. Something the SCOTUS is likely to want to get in the middle of. Dems are shitting their pants.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

The states should ignore the illegitimate pervert, block everything he does and not recognize any of his illegal decrees.

How odd...I think I read this same post..by a Democrat....4 years ago. ***chuckles*** The fringe is the fringe..no matter what party.