Texas Sues Battleground States in SCOTUS for Violating Presidential Race Rules
State files lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
The State of Texas has filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging the procedures during the presidential race in four battleground states.
The suit was filed shortly before midnight on Monday and targets Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violated the Constitution by breaching election rules.
Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution.
The Lone Star State says that these violations occurred because each of the four states made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures.
Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.
Finally, Texas argues that there were “voting irregularities” in these states as a result of the above.
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:
Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting.
The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted.
Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect—they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States.
Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures.
The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.…
This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors?
These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.
Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has announced that he will present oral arguments before the Supreme Court on behalf of the Pennsylvania election lawsuit if the SCOTUS agrees to hear the case.
Senator Cruz, one of America's highest-profile lawmakers, said on Monday he will back President Donald Trump's campaign by presenting the election fraud case out of Pennsylvania if the nation’s highest court decides to take the appeal.
“Petitioner’s legal team has asked me whether I would be willing to argue the case before the Supreme Court if the Court grants certiorari,” Cruz said in a statement to Fox News.
“I have agreed, and told them that, if the Court takes the appeal, I will stand ready to present the oral argument.”
“As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution," he added.
"I believe the Supreme Court has a responsibility to the American people to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.”