Read on Twitter
Our news media has disintegrated. I am providing a breakdown of ongoing election law suits designed to correct the fraudulent results:
I list caption (Court where pending)
States potentially affected
Legal issue.
Significance level
RT; Follow; Name your next offspring "Joe".
I list caption (Court where pending)
States potentially affected
Legal issue.
Significance level
RT; Follow; Name your next offspring "Joe".
Carson v Simon (8th Circuit)
MN
1. Can MN receive/count ballots a week after election of post-marked by 11/3?
2. Do potential GOP electors have standing to raise claim?
Minor significance.
MN
1. Can MN receive/count ballots a week after election of post-marked by 11/3?
2. Do potential GOP electors have standing to raise claim?
Minor significance.
Michigan Alliance v. Benson (MI CT of Appeals)
MI
1. Can Sec.of State allow/count ballots post-marked 11/3 arriving 14 days after election?
Marginal Significance
MI
1. Can Sec.of State allow/count ballots post-marked 11/3 arriving 14 days after election?
Marginal Significance
Trump v. Boockvar (US Dist CT Western Dist PA)
PA
1. Do Covid allowances, including alleviating signature-matching requirements violate the Constitution?
Significant.
PA
1. Do Covid allowances, including alleviating signature-matching requirements violate the Constitution?
Significant.
Trump v Raffensperger (Superior Court, Fulton County)
GA
1. Contest election results citing illegal votes included in final results in violation of election code.
Significant.
GA
1. Contest election results citing illegal votes included in final results in violation of election code.
Significant.
Trump v Wisconsin Elections Commission (WI Dist Court)
WI
1. Challenge to broad availability of mail-in voting.
Significant.
WI
1. Challenge to broad availability of mail-in voting.
Significant.
Trump claimed he would file suit to stand in for TX on TX v. PA.
PA, MI, WI, GA.
Presumably, this would require filing at the District Court level seeking expedited review.
1. Challenge under same theory as TX v. PA under theory SCOTUS recognizes standing.
Significant
PA, MI, WI, GA.
Presumably, this would require filing at the District Court level seeking expedited review.
1. Challenge under same theory as TX v. PA under theory SCOTUS recognizes standing.
Significant
Ed. Note
Grading of Significance is based solely on potential level of foreseeable impact if action is successful. Not a reflection on likelihood of success or failure of any suit.
Grading of Significance is based solely on potential level of foreseeable impact if action is successful. Not a reflection on likelihood of success or failure of any suit.