Texas Files Suit Against States that Changed Election Law

Texas suit may go before the Supreme Court if they accept it.

Texas today has sued the states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan directly to the Supreme Court as original jurisdiction that alleges these states violated their constitutions by administratively and not legislatively changing the election law, which is unconstitutional. Based on what the Supreme Court orders and decides, this could determine the 2020 presidential election.

Reports say that there are several scenarios possible if the Supreme Court favorably rules on the Texas argument. From awarding those states electoral votes to Trump, which would give Trump the win, removing those states’ electoral votes from Biden. That would place the house of representatives and state delegations in the position to choose the president. Currently, there are more Republican state delegations than Democrat in the congress. If the Texas suit is successful, Trump has a clear path to reelection. This invokes original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

The State of Texas is asking the US 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.

God save the REPUBLIC.

Tommy Coleman is a retired SC public school teacher.

Please “like”, comment, share with a friend, and donate to support The Standard on this page.