Texas lawsuit overturning election results in four states: what the Supreme Court decided

More than 100 Republican congressmen signed a letter in support of the lawsuit in the Supreme Court over the US presidential election, writes "Voice of America".

Photo: Shutterstock

More than 100 Republican legislators in the US House of Representatives signed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of the Texas lawsuit over elections in several US states. The letter alleges that in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin, "usurpation of power has led to the creation of illegal ballots."

“This letter conveys the concerns of Members of Congress, shared by many millions of their constituents, that unconstitutional irregularities in the 2020 Presidential Election call into question the election and the security of the U.S. election system,” the letter said.

Earlier, attorneys general of 17 Republican-led states joined the lawsuit filed by the Texas Attorney General in the US Supreme Court over elections in four American states, where Biden won.

Recall that December 8 Texas filed with the US Supreme Court a lawsuit against the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, in which the changes made by these states in the electoral procedures in the context of the coronavirus pandemic were declared illegal. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asked the Supreme Court to postpone the date of the US Electoral College voting and to prohibit Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania electors from voting. Instead, he asked the Supreme Court to authorize the legislatures of these states to appoint other electors.

Suit supported by attorneys general the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.

The letter in support of the Texas lawsuit notes that its purpose is to "protect the constitutional role of state legislatures in establishing the manner in which electors are appointed in the election of the President to ensure that the Electoral College will elect the candidate for President of the United States who has been selected by the legal votes."

“The letter, which was signed by more than 100 House Republicans, is about protecting the Constitution. The Constitution is very clear that election officials and state executives cannot change the presidential election process without the approval of state legislators. Additionally, it is unconstitutional to refuse to verify signatures on mail-in ballots when state laws clearly state that they must be verified. "We demand that the Supreme Court carefully consider the lawsuit and provide clarity to Americans who have serious concerns about both the unconstitutional abuse of power by certain state officials and the security of the presidential election," the congresswoman tweeted about the congresswoman's letter. Republican Elise Stefanik.

The letter of the Republicans, as well as the positions of 17 state attorneys general, met with criticism from political opponents, some media representatives, and observers.

“It is popular to say that the 106 Republican congressmen and 17 state attorneys general should be ashamed and realize that what they are doing is wrong. I think this is the wrong position. I believe they are sincere. They believe it. They are weak people who cannot live in a democratic country. They want an American Erdogan, Orban, Putin,” Politico editor Joshua Zeitz writes on Twitter.

Republican congressman Chip Roy expressed his disagreement with the letter from the Republicans, noting that the Texas lawsuit “represents a dangerous violation of federalism and sets a precedent for one state asking federal courts to review the voting procedures of other states.” At the same time, the lawmaker echoed concerns about the approval of mass voting by mail in US elections and changes in the rules for verifying signatures on ballots adopted before the election.

On the subject: The inauguration of the President of the United States: interesting facts and traditions

Supreme Court declines to challenge election results in four states

On Friday, December 11, the Supreme Court denied Texas a challenge to the election results in four states critical to the political fate of Donald Trump, writes USA Today.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially recognized interest in how another state conducts its elections,” the court said in a brief ruling. He dismissed all other related claims as moot.

The actions of the judges allow electors to gather in 50 states and the District of Columbia on Monday, December 14, and virtually confirm that President-elect Joe Biden will become the 46th president of the country.

In a matter of days, the Texas lawsuit turned into a war, in which almost all US states participated. Four states on the battlefield returned fire, and Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro called the effort to invalidate the ballots of millions of citizens "a seditious abuse of the lawsuit."

“Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states to produce results it does not agree with,” Shapiro told the judges in legal papers. “His request that the court exercise its original jurisdiction and then appoint Texas's preferred presidential candidate has no legal defensibility and is an affront to the principles of constitutional democracy.”

In response to this decision, Shapiro said that "the prompt rebuttal of this decision by the Supreme Court should make anyone who thinks about further attacks on our elections think twice."

The attempt was unsuccessful for several reasons. States hold their own elections, so interference by Texas with other state procedures is a violation of state sovereignty. Federal law obeys the states in selecting 538 electors, and Congress ultimately counts those votes. Moreover, voters in the contested states followed the rules of voting, including by mail, and would be disenfranchised if Texas refused. Lawsuits filed by Trump's campaign headquarters and allies across the country have found no verifiable cases of fraud.

“Every American who cares about the rule of law should take solace that the Supreme Court — including all three Trump-nominated justices — has put this issue to rest,” Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska tweeted.

While interstate disputes can be referred directly to the Supreme Court without prior review by the lower courts, the judges reject such requests at their discretion. For example, in 2016, a court refused to hear a dispute between Colorado and two neighboring states over the cross-border impact of legalizing marijuana.

Associate Judges Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said on Friday, December 11, that they would have granted Texas' request to initiate proceedings, but "would not have provided any other assistance."

However, some opponents of the Texas suit were disappointed by the brief, unsigned court order. The Fix the Court ethics team lamented this, believing that the condemnation should have been stronger.

“The Supreme Court could have unanimously declared the danger the Texas petition poses to our democracy,” the group wrote on Twitter. “We wondered if some of the nine justices were sympathetic to Texas’ seditious request.”

You may be interested in: top New York news, stories of our immigrants and helpful tips about life in the Big Apple - read it all on ForumDaily New York

It was the second time in recent days that a court has rejected attempts to prevent Trump's defeat. On Tuesday, December 8, judges rejected an attempt by Rep. Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania and others to block the state's election results. These challengers argued that the 2019 expansion of the state legislature to vote by mail was illegal.

All four states facing the challenge told judges that Texas' request should be denied. Georgia said judges should not “transfer state election powers to the federal judiciary.” In Michigan, that Texas “has no conscious interest in how Michigan conducts its elections.” And Wisconsin officials said "harm and public interest factors weigh heavily against Texas' extraordinary request to deny millions of voters the opportunity to make a choice."

Read also on ForumDaily:

Biden selected the mayor of Los Angeles in his administration: city residents protest

Election Protests in Washington: 8 People in Hospital, Dozens Arrested

What is the certification of presidential election results, and how it works

Beat Trump: Biden and Harris Win 2020 Man of the Year

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.