As reported by Breitbart, “The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution.”
Because these states made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions and not through the state legislatures, the differences in voting rules and procedures violate the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.
According to the lawsuit; 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.
The basis for the suit is if these states violated the Electors Clause by changing election rules outside the legislature, the results aren’t legal and affect the legal voting tabulations in all other states by substantially changing the outcome of the 2020 general election.
Texas is suing to have the electors chosen by the state legislatures instead as the means to certify the 2020 election.
In reality, this solution is not only a viable one considering the number of video and sworn affidavits being presented in court; it provides a backstop protecting the states in question. State legislators are directly responsible to their constituency.
Unless a legislator is willing to throw away their career serving the district they represent, the results will reflect the district’s vote in 2020.
The aim of the lawsuit is to shed illegal and unlawful ballots from tainting the tabulation so states such as Texas can assure their own citizens Texas ballots counted.
If the Texas Supreme Court suit is successful it will provide the means for avoiding the 12th Amendment protest of the Electoral College election certification on January 6, 2021, in the House of Representatives. Should that happen and the procedural criteria be met, the House would elect the President with each state represented getting one vote.
CDMedia is being de-platformed and obviously too effective! We need your support to put more reporters in the field! Help us here!
The last time the 12th Amendment challenge was invoked was in 2016 by three Democrat Representatives but failed to meet the criteria to challenge Donald Trump’s presidency.
According to Politico, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said in a phone interview that she and her allies plan to challenge the validity of electoral votes in multiple states, where she argued voter suppression tactics may have tainted the outcome. She said a separate batch of challenges will focus on disqualifying electors who may have been ineligible to serve at all.
“This is an American question of justice and fairness and the appropriate running of presidential elections,” Jackson Lee said.
Rep. James McGovern (D-Mass.) protested Alabama’s electoral votes, citing the entirely disproven Russian interference story fabricated by the DNC during the 2016 presidential election.
If Texas is not satisfied with the Supreme Court Decision, Rep. James McGovern, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, and the Democrats might finally get closure to the DNC witch hunt they instigated against President Donald Trump. The question is will he and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee be willing to live with justice, fairness, and an appropriate conclusion to the presidential election?
- Texas Asks Supreme Court To Rule Election In Four Battleground States Unconstitutional
- Governor Kemp: Will Your Thirty Pieces Of Silver Keep You From Calling A Special Legislative Session?