The state of Texas on Tuesday directly filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court of the United States, objecting to the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, arguing that they violated the Constitution.
Texas alleged that these states violated the “Electors Clause” stipulated in the Constitution because these states have changed voting rules and procedures through court or administrative measures (not state legislatures).
In addition, Texas also stated that there are differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the same state, which violates the constitution’s “Equal Protection Clause.” Therefore, Texas believes that based on the above reasons, these states have “voting violations” in the 2020 presidential election.
“Plaintiff State respectfully submits that the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging-chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law,” the Supreme Court motion (pdf) states. “Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future elections.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed the challenge on the day of the so-called safe-harbor deadline. The cumulative electoral votes in the four states are enough to determine the outcome of the 2020 election.
“Trust in the integrity of our election processes is sacrosanct and binds our citizenry and the States in this Union together. Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election,” Paxton said in a statement.
“The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,” he added. “Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.”
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.
The Trump campaign and third-party groups have pending legal challenges in all of the states, but to date, only a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania Republicans has escalated to the nation’s highest court. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito ordered briefs for that case to be submitted by Tuesday morning, signaling that a decision on a temporary restraining order is imminent.
Ted Cruz agrees to argue Pennsylvania election case if taken up by Supreme Court
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said on Monday that he was willing to make oral arguments before the Supreme Court in an appeal seeking to block the state from taking further action to certify their election results.
The appeal is currently pending before the Supreme Court after Pennsylvania Republicans filed a request to block the finalizing of certification citing constitutional challenges.
In the instance where the certification has been finalized, Republicans asked the court to restore the “status quo” by compelling Pennsylvania officials to nullify its actions until an order from the court.
Cruz said that he was asked whether he would be willing to argue the case before the nation’s top court if the justices grant certiorari. The former Texas solicitor general said that he had agreed and that he would “stand ready to present oral arguments.”
“Because of the importance of the legal issues presented, I’ve publicly urged #SCOTUS to hear the case brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, congressional candidate Sean Parnell & state rep. candidate Wanda Logan challenging the constitutionality of the POTUS election results in PA,” Cruz wrote in his statement.
“As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution. I believe #SCOTUS has a responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.”