BREAKING: Texas Attorney General files Supreme Court lawsuit against swing states planning to certify for Joe Biden

Texas Attorney General files Supreme Court lawsuit against swing states planning to certify for Joe Biden
IMAGE CREDIT: Bob Daemmrich for The Texas Tribune

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a massive lawsuit in the Supreme Court against swing states that have or have plans to certify the election for Joe Biden amid the ongoing controversy and introduction of evidence to support the Trump team’s claims.

His lawsuit, filed on behalf of the state of Texas, asserts that:

...failing to follow the state statutory requirements for signature validation and other processes for ballot security, the entire body of such ballots is now constitutionally suspect and may not be legitimately used to determine allocation of the Defendant States’ presidential electors.

The 154-page complaint claims “significant and unconstitutional irregularities in the Defendant States,” including Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

“Non-legislative actors’ purported amendments to States’ duly enacted election laws, in violation of the Electors Clause’s vesting State legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors,” the lawsuit states.

It reads:

Taken together, these flaws affect an outcome determinative numbers of popular votes in a group of States that cast outcome-determinative numbers of electoral votes. This Court should grant leave to file the complaint and, ultimately, enjoin the use of unlawful election results without review and ratification by the Defendant States’ legislatures and remand to the Defendant States’ respective legislatures to appoint Presidential Electors in a manner consistent with the Electors Clause and pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2.

Paxton’s claim is directly addressed to the Supreme Court and has been hailed by some as a “game changer” for the Republicans contesting the election, while others have expressed doubts.

The Supreme Court has not given any indication as to whether it plans to take Paxton’s case, or even appoint a “special master”, a form of private judge, to adjudicate the case.

Will Chamberlain, a lawyer and senior counsel at the Internet Accountability Project stated on Periscope that the case was unlikely to receive a hearing solely because the Supreme Court rarely hears cases in the same way as a normal court.

However, should the case be heard, the lawsuit asks for the Supreme Court to issue the following forms of relief for the plaintiffs, who in this case are the Republicans and President Trump:

  • Declare that Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin administered the 2020 presidential election in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
  • Declare that any electoral college votes cast by such presidential electors appointed in Defendant States Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin are in violation of the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and cannot be counted.
  • Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College.
  • Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College and authorize, pursuant to the Court’s remedial authority, the Defendant States to conduct a special election to appoint presidential electors.
  • If any of Defendant States have already appointed presidential electors to the Electoral College using the 2020 election results, direct such States’ legislatures, pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2 and U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 2, to appoint a new set of presidential electors in a manner that does not violate the Electors Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment, or to appoint no presidential electors at all.
  • Enjoin the Defendant States from certifying presidential electors or otherwise meeting for purposes of the electoral college pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 5, 3 U.S.C. § 7, or applicable law pending further order of this Court.
  • Award costs to Plaintiff State.
  • Grant such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.