Pennsylvania's Reply to Texas Lawsuit

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

 

[progressive hunter]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

it says a whole lot of nothing,,,

 

[OldLady]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

A lawyer wrote that? No

 

[norwegen]

A lawyer wrote that? No

You'd think they'd at least spell affront correctly.

 

[progressive hunter]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

not yet he hasnt,,,

 

[L.K.Eder]

But Texas obviously lacks standing to bring such claims, which, in any event, are barred by laches, and are moot, meritless, and dangerous. Texas has not suffered harm simply because it dislikes the result of the election, and nothing in the text, history, or structure of the Constitution supports Texas’s view that it can dictate the manner in which four other states run their elections. Nor is that view grounded in any precedent from this Court. Tex as does not seek to have the Court interpret the Constitution, so much as disregard it.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

Your link is BLOCKED!

Here from this always good link from the SCOTUS website, for all related Proceeding and Orders.

and here is the 43 page response from the Commonwealth of Penn

 

[L.K.Eder]

i like how they totally bitchslapped Texas, and specifically the nonsense "calculations" by cicchetti. lol

 

[Pete7469]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

No... democrook operatives stuffed ballot boxes. Biden didn't win shit.

 

[Mac-7]

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

You mean any outcome where biden wins is good

But 19 states and counting disagree

 

[L.K.Eder]

Michigan has also responded. lol

 

[Sunsettommy]

Part of the state of Pennsylvania supports the Plaintiff as shown HERE in their amicus brief, this one is just 19 pages total.

Dec 10 2020	Motion of Certain Select Pennsylvania State Senators for leave to file amicus brief submitted.
​	Main DocumentProof of ServiceCertificate of Word Count

LINK

The important section:

"STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE1

Certain select Pennsylvania State Senators2 bring this brief as Amici Curiae in support of their authority as a legislative body under the U.S. Constitution. The Pennsylvania Senate, together with the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, comprises the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The General Assembly, as the legislature of Pennsylvania, is given authority to prescribe the “Times, Places, and Manner of holding elections” under Article I, § 4, cl. 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Amici present the following arguments in support of neither plaintiff nor defendants and respectfully request they be heard in support of the General Assembly’s primary authority to enact election regulations pursuant to the Constitution’s plain text. Because the issues raised in this action directly pertain to the General Assembly’s power under the U.S. Constitution, Amici have a significant interest in this case.


SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

The Elections Clause of Article I, § 4 of the U.S. Constitution delegates to state legislatures in the first instance, and Congress in the second, the authority to enact regulations for federal elections. Neither State nor Federal courts have any such delegation of power.3 The plain language of the text, the history of the text, and the history of the founders who wrote the text all point to this obvious conclusion. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, aided and abetted by Kathy Boockvar—the politically friendly Secretary of State—had a different opinion. In a majority opinion in Pa. Democratic Party v. Boockvar, 238 A.3d 345 (Pa. 2020), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania took for itself the legislative power conferred directly upon the Pennsylvania General Assembly by the U.S. Constitution, and, in so doing, effectively declared itself the rex imperator of Pennsylvania elections. Using the pandemic as an excuse, the Pennsylvania Secretary of State and Supreme Court both disregarded and rewrote Pennsylvania law by, in one motion, advocating for and ordering the extension of the statutorilyprescribed time for absentee ballots to be received. In fact, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ignored the factual findings of their own assigned special master in Crossey v. Boockvar, 2020 Pa. LEXIS 4868 (Sept. 17, 2020). These actions wrested from the Pennsylvania General Assembly its constitutionally designated authority and impermissibly took that power for the Supreme Court. This Court should disclaim the “authority” of State and Federal courts and Executive officials from enacting their own election regulations in contravention of duly enacted state law and affirm the rights of State legislatures to do the same."

ARGUMENT I. ONLY STATE LEGISLATURES AND CONGRESS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE ELECTIONS.

======

Read the rest, it is an important argument many didn't know about.

 

[konradv]

A lawyer wrote that? No

Well, everything's spelled right, so they're head and shoulders above the Trump Team. What are they, 1-75 by now?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Brief

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Since Election Day, State and Federal courts
throughout the country have been flooded with frivo-
lous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths
of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the elec-
tion. The State of Texas has now added its voice to the
cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate
elections in four states for yielding results with which
it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its
original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’s preferred
candidate for President is legally indefensible and is an
afront to principles of constitutional democracy.



HOLY SHIT!!!! That Prelim is filled to the brim with FUCKING ASS HURT!!!

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

Why indeed?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania took for itself the legislative power conferred directly upon the Pennsylvania General Assembly by the U.S. Constitution, and, in so doing, effectively declared itself the rex imperator of Pennsylvania elections.

Yep.

That's why this has a REAL shot at forcing a 12th Amendment process.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Georgia and Wisconsin as well.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why would they be hurt? Biden won.

You mean any outcome where biden wins is good

But 19 states and counting disagree

Tim Pool has an excellent review of the Texas v Pennsylvania case.

 

[wamose]

The Pa. supreme court always takes offense when anything is said against their beloved Democrat party. They're totalitarian liberals and total assholes. It's a travesty that such a court exists in the US.

 

[OldLady]

Georgia and Wisconsin as well.

Those poor state attorneys were up all night getting that done in time. From now on, all state lawyers should get a three week vacation before the next election, in case whining Republicans lose. They'll need the rest.