SCOTUS TX CASE - RANDOM THOUGHTS

1/ Standing - those arguing that TX lacks standing to sue under the Elections & Electors Clause are, in essence, arguing that it is a political question unresolvable by the Court.

2/ If TX lacks standing to challenge other states' electoral law changes, then no state would ever have standing to do so. In essence, the Constitution becomes a contract with no remedy for breach by a party.

3/ But unlike the gerrymandering cases, the Court can grant relief to TX here by simply declaring that 4 states changes were unlawful and enjoining the appointment of electors based on those results. What happens next is up the the legislatures.

4/ Lib Twitter predictions of a 9-0 "smackdown" of TX are wildly naive and ill-informed. SCOTUS has already foreshadowed its concerns over non-legislative changes to state election laws. That's not gong to suddenly become a non-issue.

5/ Re fears that a ruling "opens the floodgates" to generalized state v. state litigation, that's simply untrue. This case can be cabined to the Elections and Electors Clause and, just like Bush v. Gore, be limited in future application.