Will SCOTUS Defend Republic or Criminal Coup?
John R. Houk, Blog Editor
December 10, 2020
As of 3:12 PM 12/9/20; The Gateway Pundit
reports SEVENTEEN States joined Texas in suing Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania over Election UNCONSTITUTIONAL issues directly to SCOTUS. (My
opinion: Nevada and Arizona should be included as culprits.)
I am cross posting three articles beginning with the article
by TGP. This will be followed by an Epoch
Times article touching on President Trump’s perspective. Which
will be followed by a Just The News
article examining a Constitutional application of the Texas-Plus lawsuit.
Hopefully more States demand SCOTUS end this Dem-Marxist
Election criminality AND a bunch of Patriots swamp the SCOTUS building in
peaceful (UNLESS the Dem-Marxist paramilitary Antifa/BLM show up)
protest.
JRH 12/10/20
I need your generosity via - credit, check
& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal
account:
Or support by getting in the Coffee from home
business –
OR just buy
some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech
Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!
******************************
UPDATE: 17 States Join Texas in Supreme Court Lawsuit
Against Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania Over Fraudulent Election
By Jim Hoft
Published December 9, 2020 at 3:12pm
earlier today TGP
reported that Missouri is the latest state to join Texas in
their lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin at the US
Supreme Court.
Election integrity is central to our republic. And I will defend it at every turn.
— Eric Schmitt (@Eric_Schmitt) December 9, 2020
As I have in other cases - I will help lead the effort in support of Texas’ #SCOTUS filing today.
Missouri is in the fight. https://t.co/V3aLHrYnOF
It’s not just Missouri, on Tuesday Allen
West told Steve Bannon on the War Room, “I think you’re going
to see ten states sign on to this petition and lawsuit. I know as you said
Louisiana just came on board.”
Seven states have already reportedly joined Texas in their
lawsuit against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
And the list has now grown to 17 states.
MO, AL, AR, FL, NE, ND, OK, IN, KS, LA, MS, MT, SC, SD,
TN, UT and WV.
The 17 STATES listed as backing Texas' lawsuit against WI, MI, PA & GA in the SUPREME COURT:
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) December 9, 2020
MO, AL, AR, FL, NE, ND, OK, IN, KS, LA, MS, MT, SC, SD, TN, UT & WV. pic.twitter.com/uZIoBS5676
Here is a Scribd document of the lawsuit.
16 States JoinTexas v. Penn... by Jim Hoft
Jim Hoft
is the founder and editor of The Gateway Pundit, one of the top conservative
news outlets in America. Jim was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media
Award in 2013 and is the proud recipient of the Breitbart Award for Excellence
in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2016.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump Says He Will Intervene in Texas’ SCOTUS Election
Case
An American flag waves in
front of the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill in Washington on Nov.
2, 2020. (Patrick Semansky/AP Photo)
By TOM OZIMEK
December 9, 2020 Updated: December 9, 2020
President Donald
Trump said Wednesday that he and/or members of his legal team
would join, as intervenors, the lawsuit brought by Texas’ Republican Attorney
General Ken Paxton to the U.S. Supreme
Court against four battleground states.
“We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other
states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!” Trump said in
a tweet.
An intervention, in legal terms, is a procedure that lets a
nonparty join ongoing litigation if the case affects the rights of that party.
The court considering an application to intervene, in this case the U.S.
Supreme Court, has the discretion to allow or deny such a request.
In the lawsuit, Texas is alleging that Pennsylvania,
Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin introduced last-minute unconstitutional changes to election laws,
treated voters unequally, and triggered significant voting irregularities by
relaxing ballot-integrity measures. The lawsuit is asking the U.S. Supreme
Court to declare that the four battleground states conducted the 2020
election in violation of the Constitution.
The suit, filed on Dec. 7 and docketed the next day, is also
seeking to prohibit the count of the Electoral College votes cast by the
four states. For the defendant states that have already appointed electors, it
asks the court to direct the state legislatures to appoint new electors in line
with the Constitution.
Trump’s remarks about joining the suit as an intervenor came
after several states expressed their support for the lawsuit. Attorneys
general for Arkansas, Alabama, Missouri, and Louisiana have issued statements
in support of Paxton’s motion.
On Tuesday, the president wondered if lawmakers or judges
have the courage to help him challenge election results in key
battleground states.
“Let’s see whether or not somebody has the courage—whether
it’s a legislator or legislatures, or whether it’s a justice of the Supreme
Court or a number of justices of the Supreme Court. Let’s see if they have the
courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right,” Trump told a press
conference in Washington during a summit on COVID-19 vaccines.
In the complaint to the Supreme Court, Paxton argues
that the four battleground states had acted in a way that violated their
own election laws and thereby breached the Constitution through enacting and
implementing new measures, rules, and procedures right before the Nov. 3
election.
In some instances, the defendant states enacted such
measures through the use of so-called friendly lawsuits, in which the plaintiff
and the defendant collude to procure a court order, the lawsuit alleges. In
other instances, a variety of state election officials allegedly exceeded their
authority to promulgate rules and procedures that should have been enacted
by each state’s legislature, as required by the Constitution’s Elections
and Electors clause.
“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,” Paxton
said in a statement.
Attorneys general from the defendant states have disputed
the allegations in the lawsuit.
Paxton argued that the actions he outlined in his complaint “constitute
non-legislative changes to State election law by executive-branch State
election officials, or by judicial officials” and, as such, votes cast by
Electoral College electors pursuant to these actions should not be considered
constitutionally valid.
Texas is also asking the Supreme Court (pdf) to grant a preliminary injunction or a temporary
restraining order to block the four states from taking action to certify their
election results or to prevent the state’s presidential electors from taking
any official action. The presidential electors are scheduled to meet on Dec.
14.
The court has ordered the defendant states to respond to
Texas’s motions by 3 p.m. Thursday, Dec. 10.
Janita Kan contributed to this
report.
Follow Tom on Twitter: @OZImekTOM
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Texas files lawsuit directly to Supreme
Court challenging election results in four states
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton argues WI, MI, PA
and GA made changes to election rules without legislative consent, violating
the U.S. Constitution
By John
Solomon and Carrie Sheffield
Updated: December 8, 2020 - 3:49pm
In a novel
legal strike, the state of Texas has asked the Supreme Court to invalidate the
election results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia, arguing
officials in those four battleground states violated the Constitution by making
changes to how ballots were cast and counted without legislative approval.
The lawsuit filed late Monday night by Texas Attorney
General Ken Paxton asked the justices to issue a temporary restraining
order preventing the states "from taking action to certify presidential
electors or to have such electors take any official action
including without limitation participating in the electoral college."
The suit argues that changes made by the state's governors,
secretaries of states and election supervisors were "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."
"I'm worried about the credibility of elections, not
just right now, but I'm worried about the credibility of elections going
forward," Paxton told Just the News on Tuesday afternoon in a phone
interview. "I'm not making a fraud argument, I'm making an argument based
on the Constitution. And what we know happened, which was that we know state
law was changed by people other than the state legislature, which is the only
constitutionally authorized changes that are allowed ... My argument is that
the law was violated, the constitution was violated. I'm not addressing whether
there was 2 million fraudulent ballots cast in Pennsylvania. I don't
know, and there's no way to know, the way the system got set up, the way
the rules got changed."
States are allowed in certain circumstances to appeal
directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing lower federal courts, in disputes
involving other states. Paxton argued the state of Texas was wrongly
harmed by the unconstitutional acts of the other states.
"These non-legislative changes ... 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," the suit stated. "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."
You can read the full lawsuit here:
Paxton said the defendant states may have had good
intentions in making changes to the elections to address COVID-19 but
nonetheless violated the Constitution, requiring a dramatic remedy.
"Certain officials in the Defendant
States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state
laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting," the suit argued. "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."
The lawsuit was backed by the Thomas More Society's Amistad
Project, a conservative group that has taken the national lead in challenging
election irregularities in 2020. "The lawless nature of the 2020
election is on full display in the suit filed by Texas," Amistad director
Phill Kline said. "There was a coordinated and unprecedented effort of
private interests improperly joining with leftist government officials to
illegally support the democrat ticket in this election. This involved the
sharing of sensitive citizen information with the private sector and the flow
of more than $500 million from the private sector to targeted government
officials and local governments."
Paxton told Just the News he did not rely on research from
the Amistad Project in his lawsuit and as of Tuesday afternoon had not spoken
with other states about the issue but anticipated he could when he arrives in
Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. Paxton's scheduled to meet with President Trump
on a pre-arranged meeting.
Paxton rejected interpretations of stare
decisis arguments saying that some states have wrongly
trying to redefine who has constitutional authority over running
elections in order to sow chaos and delay a clear
presidential election result.
"I know what the Constitution requires, and it's always
required that," Paxton said. "It's the Constitution, so if case law
says that the Constitution shouldn't be the Constitution, well, I think that
case law’s wrong."
However, Paxton said he is hopeful the U.S.
Supreme Court — including with the newly-sworn Justice Amy Coney Barrett to
possibly tip the balance — will ultimately restore Constitutional
order under a strict textualist reading that prohibits what Paxton said
was last-minute judicial usurpation of the prerogatives of state
legislatures to make election rules.
"I'm always for reading based on what the Framers
meant, otherwise we don't really have a Constitution if it's just nine judges
up there and they can make up whatever they want," Paxton said. "We
don't really have a Constitution, we just have a ruling oligarchy of nine
judges. And I'm in favor of judges who aren't making the law for us and telling
us what to do. I'm in favor of judges who are put there, they look at the law
as it was written, whether by a legislature by the Founders, and they follow
it. That's their job.”
___________________________
UPDATE: 17 States Join Texas in Supreme Court Lawsuit
Against Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania Over Fraudulent Election
© 2020 The
Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.
__________________________
Trump Says He Will Intervene in Texas’ SCOTUS Election
Case
Copyright © 2000 – 2020 The Epoch Times
_________________________________
Texas files lawsuit directly to Supreme Court
challenging election results in four states
© 2020 Bentley Media Group, LLC
ABOUT
Just The News
No comments:
Post a Comment