Read on Twitter
Should we do a thread about the allegations of 2020 election fraud actually at issue in the mind boggling Texas case? https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1336811823232921600
Just finished reading the section on Pennsylvania and it does not allege that any voter committed any crime or voted improperly in 2020. Shocker. ( https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/162953/20201207234611533_TX-v-State-Motion-2020-12-07%20FINAL.pdf)
Same with Georgia. The Texas case does not allege that any voter acted improperly.
Same with Michigan and Wisconsin --- no allegations that any voter acted improperly. It does allege that a worker counted an unspecified number of votes multiple times (probably bogus anyway) and that the USPS --- a Trump Administration agency --- lost ballots.
The Texas case essentially contends there was a procedural foul --- not that there was illegal voting OR that mail-in voting is illegal (they didn't sue ANY of the five states that already did all mail-in voting). Mainly just that the states chose to do it improperly.
The Texas case, supported by Trump and now 106 congressional Republicans, asks SCOTUS to direct PA, GA, MI, and WI to:
* Hold a new special election for President (impractical).
* Have state legislature decide who won.
* Be excluded from presidential election.
* Hold a new special election for President (impractical).
* Have state legislature decide who won.
* Be excluded from presidential election.
There is a lot that is remarkable about this case. Republicans are suggesting that all voters in four states be disenfranchised even though they haven't said that any of those voters did anything wrong. That goes against the whole concept of democracy.
The case is, in part, about voting procedures that were known weeks or months ahead of the election. SCOTUS will not look favorably at a case that could have been resolved before anyone voted, alleviating the issue of disenfranchisement.
Another bonkers aspect of the Texas case is that among its amici curiae supporters are 16 representatives who won elections in the very states the case says were conducted unconstitutionally and should be redone or thrown out. No doubt they will claim their House seats in Jan.
Sorry @RepBuddyCarter @RepDrewFerguson @AustinScottGA08 @reprickallen (GA) @RepJackBergman @RepHuizenga @RepMoolenaar @RepWalberg (MI) you're right in your Texas amicus that your election shouldn't be certified, so we won't recognize you as the rep from your district next year!
Sorry @RepMeuser @RepScottPerry @RepFredKeller @RepJohnJoyce @GReschenthaler @CongressmanGT @MikeKellyPA (PA) @RepTiffany (WI) you're right in your Texas amicus that your election shouldn't be certified, so we won't recognize you as the rep from your district next year!
The Texas case alleges NEITHER that anyone voted illegally NOR that mail-in voting is unconstitutional. It ONLY alleges procedures were changed by the wrong state officials. For that, all voters of those states should be silenced (but not in elections where Rs won). Bonkers.
The 19 Republican representatives are both calling for their election to be tossed out but also we assume plan to take office in January. Which I suppose is the definition of rejecting democracy. https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1337471666176274432
SCOTUS has thrown out the Texas case in words that could fit easily in one tweet.
Its incredible how many House Republicans, including their leader, signed onto a case that was so meritless that it got a ~50 word unanimous rejection from SCOTUS. Probably because it was never about the merits or winning --- rather, remaining relevant and getting your donations.
"Standing" is an interesting and little understood aspect of the U.S. judicial system. But if you read court opinions regularly, you'd recognize it as basically the first section in every case, making it extremely normal and typically very mundane. But it applies to everyone!
