fbpx
Wikipedia

Texas v. Pennsylvania

April 26, 2024

Texas v. Pennsylvania, 592 U.S. ___ (2020), was a lawsuit filed at the United States Supreme Court contesting the administration of the 2020 presidential election in four other states, in which Joe Biden defeated incumbent Donald Trump.

Texas v. Pennsylvania
Decided December 11, 2020
Full case nameState of Texas v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State of Georgia, State of Michigan, and State of Wisconsin
Docket no.22O155
Holding
Texas lacks Article III standing to sue other states over how they conduct their own elections. Case dismissed.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinion
Per curiam
StatementAlito, joined by Thomas
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 2, art. III

Filed by Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton on December 8, 2020, under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction, Texas v. Pennsylvania alleged that Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin violated the United States Constitution by changing election procedures through non-legislative means – thus violating the independent state legislature theory. The suit sought to temporarily withhold the certified vote count from these four states prior to the Electoral College vote on December 14. The suit was filed after about 90 lawsuits arising from disputes over the election results filed by Trump and the Republican Party had failed in numerous state and federal courts.

The suit had been drafted by a team of lawyers with ties to the Trump presidential campaign. Paxton agreed to file the case after other state attorneys general declined to do so. The Solicitor General of Texas Kyle D. Hawkins objected to the suit and refused to let his name be added. Paxton hired Lawrence J. Joseph, who had helped draft the suit, as special counsel to assist with the suit.[1]

Within one day of Texas's filing, Trump, over 100 Republican Representatives, and 18 Republican state attorneys general filed motions to support the case.[2][3] Trump referred to this case as "the big one" of the election-challenging lawsuits.[4] Attorneys general for the defendant states, joined in briefs submitted by their counterparts from twenty other states, two territories, and the District of Columbia,[5] urged the Court to refuse the case, with Pennsylvania's brief calling it a "seditious abuse of the judicial process".[6] Legal experts argued that the case was not likely to be heard and not likely to succeed if it did get heard, and that it was thus a "Hail Mary" action.[7][8][9]

The Supreme Court issued orders on December 11, declining to hear the case on the basis that Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge the results of the election held by another state.[10][11]

Background edit

Main articles: Pre-election and Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election

Several states changed their voting laws prior to the 2020 United States presidential election to make postal voting easier, due to fears that in-person voting would expose people to COVID-19. Legal challenges to the changes were raised across the country. A number of these cases involved voting regulations that were altered by states' executive branches and not by state legislatures. In Texas v. Pennsylvania, Texas claimed that such alterations violated Article Two of the United States Constitution.[12]

The initial tallies of votes, completed within the week of election day, showed that Joe Biden had won sufficient votes in the Electoral College to secure the presidency over incumbent Donald Trump. Trump and the Republican National Committee (RNC) launched many lawsuits against swing states challenging their vote tallies, particularly in states that had voted for Trump in the 2016 United States presidential election but had turned to Biden in 2020, such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia. Most of the cases raised by Trump and the RNC were dismissed on procedural grounds or rejected on substantive grounds in the courts and did not affect the projected Electoral College result.[13] PolitiFact noted that the forces behind reversing the election had by this point "lost dozens of election lawsuits."[14]

Before and after the election, Trump stated his expectation that the Supreme Court would determine the outcome. After the election, his legal team sought to bring a case before the Court, on which conservative justices—including three appointed by Trump—held a 6–3 majority.[15]

Filings edit

Procedure edit

The case was filed on December 8, 2020, directly with the Supreme Court as it holds original jurisdiction over disputes between states.[16][17][18] Such cases are infrequent: there were 123 "original jurisdiction" cases from 1789 to 1959.[19] Original jurisdiction cases are immediately docketed pursuant to Rule 17 once the plaintiff submits its motion for leave to file and pays its docket fees.[20][a] Because the suit requested expedited consideration, the Court set a deadline at 3:00 p.m. on December 10 for the four defendant states to respond.[19][21] Whereas a typical case submitted through a writ of certiorari requires only four justices to accept to be certified by the Supreme Court, this case would have required five justices.[22]

Texas edit

See also: Independent state legislature theory

The suit was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. It claimed that Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin violated the Constitution by changing their election procedures to limit the spread of COVID-19.[23] The case was filed on the same day as the "safe harbor" threshold, beyond which Congress must accept certified results from states ahead of the Electoral College's official vote on December 14, 2020.[18][16] The suit alleged that the four states "ignor[ed] statutory requirements as to how [mail-in ballots] were received, evaluated and counted".[24] It further argued that electoral processes in the four defendant states "suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities", and therefore that it was not clear who "legitimately won the 2020 election".[25]

In the lawsuit, Texas alleged that the defendant states, by changing their election processes, violated three clauses of the Constitution: the Electors Clause (Article II, Section 1, Clause 2), the Equal Protection Clause, and the Due Process Clause.[26][27] In particular, it argued the Constitution requires changes to electoral procedures to be made only by state legislatures, and not by executives such as secretaries of state.[28] Accordingly, it argued, changes to election procedures made by executive action, and not by alterations to state law, rendered election results constitutionally infirm.[28]

Texas argued it had standing to sue to prevent its votes from becoming "diluted".[29] Texas instead alleged that "fraud becomes undetectable" because "unlawful actions of election officials effectively destroy the evidence". Whether "voters committed fraud" was not the "constitutional issue" in this case, according to Texas. Therefore, Texas declared that it did not need to "prove" fraud.[30]

Texas sought relief by requesting the Supreme Court block those four states from voting in the electoral college and extend the deadline by which states must submit their certified vote.[23]

Texas, in its December 11 response to the defendant states, stated "Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief."[31] In an interview, Paxton further argued that "the only place we can file is the Supreme Court, and we did what we did appropriately, so to call it 'seditious' is really ridiculous."[32] In response to commentators who said the action was a Hail Mary, Paxton said, "Unless you throw the pass, you can't complete it."[32]

Amici curiae respondents edit

 
  Plaintiff Texas (TX)
  Defendants (WI, MI, PA, GA) opposed Texas
  States with attorneys general filing in support of Texas
  States with attorneys general filing in support of the Defendant states. The District of Columbia which is a federal district also filed in support as did Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, two U.S. Territories.
  States with attorneys general filing brief in support of neither side
  State with attorney general filing in support of Texas, but the governor filing in support of the Defendant states.

Supporting plaintiff Texas edit

Attorneys general of seventeen additional states filed a joint brief on December 9 supporting Texas.[33][19][34]

On the same day, Trump filed a motion to intervene in his personal capacity, thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff.[35] Trump's brief was filed by Chapman University School of Law professor John C. Eastman, who in August 2020 authored an article published in Newsweek questioning Kamala Harris's eligibility for the position of vice president.[36] On social media, the president referred to the case as "the big one".[37] Over 120 Republican members of the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in support of the suit, including leader Kevin McCarthy and his deputy Steve Scalise.[38][39][40] 106 members of the House initially signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff.[41] 20 additional members of the House signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff before it was dismissed.[42]

Later on December 10, attorneys general of six states that had already responded in an amicus brief, Arkansas, Utah, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and South Carolina, petitioned to the Supreme Court to let them join Texas as a plaintiff in the case.[43] This effort was led by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt.[43]

List of attorneys general supporting Texas
List of 126 House of Representative members supporting Texas

Supporting defendant states edit

An amicus curiae brief on the side of the defendants was filed by a group of former Republican office holders and officials.[44]

The defendant states responded on December 10, urging the Court to reject the case. Pennsylvania's reply called the suit a "seditious abuse of the judicial process".[6] The states urged that the justices "send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated".[6]

Attorneys general of the District of Columbia, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and 20 states filed a brief in support of the defendant states the same day:[5][45]

List of attorneys general supporting the defendants

Supporting both parties edit

Although Montana Attorney General Tim Fox participated in the joint brief filed on December 9 supporting Texas,[34] outgoing Montana Governor Steve Bullock filed a separate brief on December 10 in support of the defendants.[46]

Supporting neither party edit

On December 10, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a motion supporting neither side but stated that "the [s]tates need this Court to decide, at the earliest available opportunity, the question whether the Electors Clause permits state courts (and state executive officials) to alter the rules by which presidential elections are conducted."[47] Yost also stated Ohio could not support Texas's request for relief because Ohio's position is that state legislatures' power over elections should not be overridden by federal courts.[27] Arizona also filed a brief on jurisdiction but supporting neither party.[5]

Reactions to court filing edit

Law edit

The suit was criticized by legal experts and called "outlandish".[48][18][49] University of Texas School of Law law professor Stephen I. Vladeck called the suit the "craziest lawsuit filed to purportedly challenge the election". Election law expert Rick Hasen characterized the lawsuit as a "press release masquerading as a lawsuit" and "the dumbest case I've ever seen filed on an emergency basis at the Supreme Court."[50][49] Edward Foley, director of the election law program at Ohio State University, urged the court to ignore the case and refrain from interfering in the election.[17]

Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School described the 11th-hour case a "Hail Mary pass" that was "creative but unlikely to win", because alleging that Texas, instead of its voters, was injured (in order to bypass the Eleventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) is "far-fetched"; he also expressed concern that the case was filed too late.[9]

Another Harvard Law professor, Noah Feldman, characterized the lawsuit as a coup attempt by Republicans to overturn the results of the election.[51]

Senator Ted Cruz, who previously served as Solicitor General of Texas and argued several cases before the Court while serving in that capacity, accepted Trump's request to argue the case should the Court hear it.[52]

Legal experts also did not expect the Supreme Court to certify the case, given its reluctance to hear post-election challenges. On the same day as Texas's filing, the Court refused to hear arguments in another post-election challenge, Kelly v. Pennsylvania, without any dissents.[22][53] The defendants also argued that the legal principle of laches, which may bar an action if it is filed too late, is grounds for dismissing Texas's claim.[31][54][b]

Politics edit

In favor edit

Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott signaled his support for the case, saying the case "tries to accelerate the process, providing certainty and clarity about the entire election process. The United States of America needs that."[23]

President Trump retweeted several tweets that expressed support for the suit.[16] On December 9, he promised to intervene in the suit,[55] and filed a motion to do so the same day,[35][56][57] thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff. On December 10, he tweeted "the Supreme Court has a chance to save our Country from the greatest Election abuse in the history of the United States."[58] On December 11 he tweeted, "I just want to stop the world from killing itself! ... Now that the Biden Administration will be a scandal plagued mess for years to come, it is much easier for the Supreme Court of the United States to follow the Constitution and do what everybody knows has to be done."[4]

Republican Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both involved in close runoff races in Georgia, voiced support for the suit.[59] In a tweet, Republican Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt stated his support for the suit, promising to "lead the effort in support of Texas's #SCOTUS filing today".[60] On Twitter, Republican Arkansas attorney general Leslie Rutledge stated she would legally support the motion.[61] Republican Louisiana attorney general Jeff Landry also supported the complaint.[62]

In response to an email to every Republican member of the House of Representatives from Representative Mike Johnson of Louisiana, 125 Republicans joined him to sign an amicus brief supporting the suit.[63][64] The number represented a clear majority of the Republican caucus in the House.[4] Politico referred to the large number of GOP House members supporting the suit as "jaw-dropping".[65] Republican members of the Senate, on the other hand, were much less likely to speak in favor of the suit, reflecting their different temperaments and political imperatives.[65]

Against edit

The office of Republican Georgia attorney general Chris Carr also criticized the suit and Paxton. On December 8, Carr's spokeswoman said that Paxton was "constitutionally, legally[,] and factually wrong about Georgia".[49][24] Georgia's deputy secretary of state Jordan Fuchs denounced the suit as "false and irresponsible".[18] Trump warned Carr to not rally other Republican officials in opposition to the suit, and the Republican majority in the Georgia State Senate expressed their approval for the filing.[66][49][24]

 
Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro (pictured in 2019) criticized the suit.

Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel criticized the suit, labelling it a "publicity stunt ... beneath the dignity" of the Texas attorney general office and saying "[t]he erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn't attributable to the good people of Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia[,] or Pennsylvania but rather to partisan officials, like Mr. Paxton, who place loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country."[16] Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the case "genuinely embarrassing".[18] Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro stated that "[t]hese continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless—they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican party to disregard the will of the people—and name their own victors."[29]

Attorney and Lincoln Project founder George Conway called the lawsuit the "most insane thing yet".[67] Former Federal Elections Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky said, "By almost any measure, this is the legal equivalent of a Hail Mary pass."[8]

Chip Roy, a Republican Texas congressman and former chief of staff to Texas senator Ted Cruz, characterized the suit as "a dangerous violation of federalism [that] sets a precedent to have one state asking federal courts to police the voting procedures of other states".[68] Republican Texas senator and former Texas Supreme Court justice John Cornyn said he was unable "to understand the legal theory" behind the suit.[69]

Emails[70] from Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody's office revealed that lawyers in the office ridiculed the lawsuit as "batshit insane" and "weird," and speculated about Paxton's motivations for filing it.

Governor Gary Herbert and Governor-elect Spencer Cox of Utah, both Republicans, denounced Republican Utah state attorney general Sean Reyes's decision to join the amicus brief in support of the lawsuit.[71] Several other states also saw division among Republicans about whether coming out in favor of the suit was wise.[58] The Associated Press wrote that the action "has quickly become a conservative litmus test."[58]

Michael Steele, formerly the chair of the Republican National Committee, called Republican House members' decision to join the suit "an offense to the Constitution" that would "leave[] an indelible stain" on their "political skin".[72] Jeb Bush opined on the suit: "This is crazy. It will be killed on arrival".[73]

Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins, who normally would speak on behalf of the state in matters before the Supreme Court, was not listed on the suit.[43]

Statistical analysis edit

The lawsuit included a declaration from economist Charles Cicchetti, who claimed that his statistical analysis showed that there was a less than one-in-one-quadrillion chance of Biden's having won any of the states in question. Cicchetti's analysis was widely criticized,[74] since it assumed that voters behaved the same in 2020 as they had in 2016[75] and because it assumed that vote tallying patterns were random over time. In reality, Biden was a different candidate than Hillary Clinton had been in 2016, and the marked shift of early Republican vote counts to later Democratic votes counts had been anticipated well in advance, because several battleground states had forbidden mail-in ballots from being counted earlier; mail-in ballots favored Biden in part because Trump had long attempted to discredit the reliability of mail-in voting.[6]

Writing at PolitiFact, Eric Litke described the analysis as "wildly illogical", citing professors of political science who described the analysis as "ludicrous" and "statistical incompetence", with one wrong assumption being that "votes are all independently and randomly distributed".[76] At The Volokh Conspiracy, David Post described Cicchetti's analysis as "idiotic" because it was based on two blatantly false assumptions: (1) that voters' preferences had not changed since 2016, and (2) that party preferences did not differ between mail-in and in-person voters. Post stated that Paxton's use of Cicchetti's work was "unethical" because Paxton had not mentioned Cicchetti's key assumptions.[77] At The Washington Post, Philip Bump said that the analysis in the lawsuit was "utterly ridiculous", noting that the 2016 results could not be extrapolated to 2020, because Biden was more popular than Clinton and because voters had become more polarized. Bump also wrote that vote-counting was not "homogeneous", with the "blue shift" phenomenon being entirely expected due to mail-in ballots favoring Biden.[78]

Outcome edit

 
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Texas v. Pennsylvania et al.

On December 11, in an unsigned ruling, the court ruled that Texas lacked standing and denied the suit:[79][80][81][82]

The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.[11][83]

Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, disagreed with the ruling denying leave to file a bill of complaint, but did not otherwise find for the plaintiffs. He wrote that the Court is duty-bound to hear the case, referencing Thomas's dissent in Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020):

In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction ... I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.[11]

Aftermath edit

 
Republican Party of Texas chairman Allen West (pictured in 2011) alluded to secession after the court's decision.

After the Court declined to hear the case, Allen West, then-chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, suggested that "law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution".[84] The statement was criticized by Illinois Republican Adam Kinzinger, saying the call for secession was dangerous. The Lincoln Project's George Conway and National Review editor Rich Lowry also criticized West's remarks, stating they were unrepresentative of the "Party of Lincoln".[85]

President Trump harshly criticized the Court's decision, saying "This is a great and disgraceful miscarriage of justice. The people of the United States were cheated, and our Country disgraced. Never even given our day in Court!"[86][87] White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany echoed the notion that the case was never given a chance, saying the justices "hid behind procedure ... There's no way to say it other than they dodged."[88] Paxton, for his part, said the decision was "unfortunate".[89]

The Biden campaign said of the ruling: "The Supreme Court has decisively and speedily rejected the latest of Donald Trump and his allies' attacks on the democratic process. This is no surprise—dozens of judges, election officials from both parties, and Trump's own attorney general have dismissed his baseless attempts to deny that he lost the election."[90]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement that "The Court has rightly dismissed out of hand the extreme, unlawful and undemocratic GOP lawsuit to overturn the will of millions of American voters" and admonished that "Republicans must once and for all end their election subversion—immediately." Additionally she reprimanded House members who supported the lawsuit: "The 126 Republican Members that signed onto this lawsuit brought dishonor to the House. Instead of upholding their oath to support and defend the Constitution, they chose to subvert the Constitution and undermine public trust in our sacred democratic institutions."[91][92]

New Jersey Representative Bill Pascrell, citing section three of the 14th Amendment, called for Pelosi to not seat Republicans who signed the amicus curiae brief supporting the suit. This proposal would have applied to nearly two-thirds of the Republican representatives of the incoming 117th United States Congress. Pascrell stated, "The text of the 14th Amendment expressly forbids Members of Congress from engaging in rebellion against the United States. Trying to overturn a democratic election and install a dictator seems like a pretty clear example of that."[93]

See also edit

Footnotes edit

  1. ^ "Rule 17" refers to Rule 17 of the rules of the Supreme Court of the United States. See "Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. July 1, 2019. p. 17.
  2. ^ Black's Law Dictionary defines laches as, among other things, "a want of activity and diligence in making a claim or moving for the enforcement of a right (particularly in equity) which will afford ground for presuming against it, or for refusing relief, where that is discretionary with the court." See Black, Henry Campbell (1910). Black's Law Dictionary. Saint Paul, Minnesota: West. 692 – via Wikisource. LACHES. Negligence, consisting in the omission of something which a party might do, and might reasonably be expected to do, towards the vindication or enforcement of his rights. The word is generally the synonym of "remissness", "dilatoriness", "unreasonable or unexcused delay", the opposite of "vigilance", and means a want of activity and diligence in making a claim or moving for the enforcement of a right (particularly in equity) which will afford ground for presuming against it, or for refusing relief, where that is discretionary with the court. [scan  ]

References edit

  1. ^ Rutenberg, Jim; Becker, Jo; Lipton, Eric; Haberman, Maggie; Martin, Jonathan; Rosenberg, Matthew; Schmidt, Michael S. (January 31, 2021). "77 Days: Trump's Campaign to Subvert the Election". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved November 21, 2021.
  2. ^ Gillman, Todd J. (December 9, 2020). "17 states, and Trump, join Texas request for Supreme Court to overturn Biden wins in four states". The Dallas Morning News. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  3. ^ Liptak, Adam (December 8, 2020). "Texas files an audacious suit with the Supreme Court challenging the election results". The New York Times. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  4. ^ a b c Merchant, Nomaan; Richer, Alanna Durkin. "Majority of Republican House members sign on to lawsuit asking Supreme Court to invalidate presidential election". Chicago Tribune. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  5. ^ a b c Hurley, Lawrence (December 10, 2020). "States assail 'bogus' Texas bid to overturn U.S. election at Supreme Court". Reuters. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  6. ^ a b c d Cheney, Kyle; Montellaro, Zach (December 10, 2020). "'Seditious abuse of the judicial process': States reject Texas effort to overturn Biden's election". Politico. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  7. ^ "Texas tries Hail Mary to block election outcome". SCOTUSblog. December 8, 2020. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  8. ^ a b Matthews, Chris (December 9, 2020). "Trump places hopes in longshot Texas lawsuit, asking Supreme Court to overturn election results in 4 states". Market Watch. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  9. ^ a b Dershowitz, Alan. "The Dershow, December 9, 2020: Trump Team Hail Mary & Last Day to Save Brandon Bernard". from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020 – via YouTube.
  10. ^ Liptak, Adam (December 11, 2020). "Supreme Court Rejects Texas Suit Seeking to Subvert Election". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  11. ^ a b c "Order in Pending Case" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. December 11, 2020. (PDF) from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  12. ^ Howe, Amy (December 8, 2010). "Texas tries Hail Mary to block election outcome". SCOTUSblog. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  13. ^ Horton, Jake (December 9, 2020). "US election 2020: What legal challenges remain for Trump?". BBC. from the original on December 6, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  14. ^ "Donald Trump has lost dozens of election lawsuits. Here's why". PolitiFact. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  15. ^ Multiple sources:
    • "Trump thrusts Supreme Court pick into election turmoil". AP News. September 30, 2020. from the original on November 2, 2020. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
    • Mason, Jeff (September 24, 2020). "Trump hedges on transferring power, says election will end up at Supreme Court". Reuters. from the original on September 27, 2020. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
    • McCoy, Kevin; Wolf, Richard. "Lawsuit by Trump allies challenging Pennsylvania election results reaches Supreme Court". USA Today. from the original on December 8, 2020. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
    • "Trump faces tough road in getting Supreme Court to intervene". AP News. November 7, 2020. from the original on November 26, 2020. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
    • Polantz, Katelyn (December 3, 2020). "With Trump and allies headed to the Supreme Court, elections cases still dead on arrival". CNN. from the original on December 8, 2020. Retrieved December 4, 2020.
  16. ^ a b c d Brice, Makini (December 8, 2020). "Texas asks U.S. Supreme Court to help Trump upend election in long-shot lawsuit". Reuters. from the original on December 8, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  17. ^ a b Wolf, Richard (December 8, 2020). "Texas AG asks Supreme Court to overturn Trump's losses in key states. Don't hold your breath". USA Today. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  18. ^ a b c d e Higgins, Tucker; Breuninger, Kevin (December 8, 2020). "Texas sues four battleground states in Supreme Court over 'unlawful election results' in 2020 presidential race". CNBC. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  19. ^ a b c Quinn, Melissa (December 9, 2020). "Texas sues over election results in battleground states Biden won". CBS. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  20. ^ "Rule 17. Procedure in an Original Action". Legal Information Institute. from the original on November 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  21. ^ Bowden, John (December 9, 2020). "Trump asks Cruz to argue Texas case". The Hill. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  22. ^ a b de Vogue, Ariane; Berman, Dan (December 10, 2020). "Explaining the Supreme Court lawsuit from Texas and Trump challenging Biden's win". CNN. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  23. ^ a b c Platoff, Emma (December 8, 2020). "In new lawsuit, Texas contests election results in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania". Texas Tribune. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  24. ^ a b c Mosk, Matthew; Rubin, Olivia; Hosenball, Alex; Dwyer, Devin (December 8, 2020). "Supreme Court denies 1 pro-Trump election case as another hits its doorstep". ABC. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  25. ^ Howe, Amy (December 11, 2020). "Justices throw out Texas lawsuit that sought to block election outcome". SCOTUSblog. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  26. ^ Attorney General of Texas (December 7, 2020). "Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint" (PDF). Paragraphs 128–144. (PDF) from the original on December 8, 2020.
  27. ^ a b Liptak, Adam; Peters, Jeremy W. (December 11, 2020). "In Blistering Retort, 4 Battleground States Tell Texas to Butt Out of Election". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  28. ^ a b Larson, Erik; Stohr, Greg (December 8, 2020). "Trump Fans Embrace Texas Suit as Last Hope to Flip Election". Bloomberg News. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020. Paxton claims the U.S. Constitution only grants state legislatures the authority to make changes to election laws, and officials like secretaries of state who expanded mail-in voting in response to the coronavirus pandemic largely did so illegally. The Texas suit also says those states violated the equal protection clause by allowing Democratic-leaning counties to restrict Republican poll-watchers or accept ballots with minor errors.
  29. ^ a b Neidig, Harper (December 8, 2020). "Texas sues states Biden won in Supreme Court, seeking to delay Electoral College vote". The Hill. from the original on December 8, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  30. ^ Blake, Aaron (December 10, 2020). "The Trump team throws in the towel on proving voter fraud". The Washington Post. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  31. ^ a b Olson, Tyler (December 11, 2020). "Texas files reply brief in election suit at SCOTUS, final step before justices issue order in blockbuster case". Fox News. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  32. ^ a b Parke, Caleb (December 11, 2020). "Texas AG Paxton rips Pa. AG over lawsuit criticism: 'To call it seditious is really ridiculous'". Fox News. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  33. ^ "Several U.S. states back Texas bid to upend Biden election win at Supreme Court". Reuters. December 9, 2020. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  34. ^ a b "Brief of State of Missouri and 16 Other States as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint" (PDF). United States Supreme Court. December 9, 2020. (PDF) from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  35. ^ a b Trump, Donald (December 9, 2020). "Motion to Intervene of Donald J. Trump" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. (PDF) from the original on December 10, 2020.
  36. ^ Eastman, John C. (August 12, 2020). "Some Questions for Kamala Harris About Eligibility | Opinion". Newsweek. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  37. ^ Geraghty, Jim (December 10, 2020). "A Generous and Forgiving Media Brought the Bidens to This Point". The Corner. National Review. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  38. ^ Zilbermints, Regina (December 10, 2020). "More than 100 House Republicans sign brief backing Texas lawsuit challenging election results". The Hill. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  39. ^ "Which Republicans support the Texas lawsuit challenging the election results". Washington Post. December 10, 2020. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  40. ^ "House Members Who Signed a Brief Asking the Supreme Court to Consider Overturning the Election". ProPublica. August 12, 2015. from the original on February 18, 2021. Retrieved December 14, 2020.
  41. ^ "Which Republicans support the Texas lawsuit challenging the election results". The Washington Post. December 10, 2020. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved January 7, 2021.
  42. ^ Baer, Stephanie K. (December 10, 2020). "Here Are The Names Of 126 Members Of The House Who Refuse To Accept That Biden Won". Buzzfeed News. from the original on March 2, 2021. Retrieved January 7, 2021.
  43. ^ a b c Olson, Tyler (December 10, 2020). "Missouri, 5 more states ask to join Texas Supreme Court election case against Georgia, others". Fox News. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  44. ^ Adler, Jonathan H. (December 9, 2020). "Additional Filings in and Additional Thoughts on the Texas Election Suit". The Volokh Conspiracy. Reason. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  45. ^ "Motion For Leave To File And Brief For The District Of Columbia And The States And Territories Of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, U.s. Virgin Islands, And Washington As Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendants And In Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion For Leave To File A Bill Of Complaint" (PDF). United States Supreme Court. December 10, 2020. (PDF) from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  46. ^ "Motion for Leave to File and Brief of Steve Bullock, in His Official Capacity as Governor of Montana, as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendants" (PDF). United States Supreme Court. December 10, 2020. (PDF) from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  47. ^ "Motion of State of Ohio for leave to file amicus brief submitted" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. December 10, 2020. (PDF) from the original on December 10, 2020.
  48. ^ Stohr, Greg; Larson, Erik (December 8, 2020). "Trump Fans Embrace Texas Suit as Last Hope to Flip Election". Bloomberg. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  49. ^ a b c d Liptak, Adam (December 8, 2020). "Texas files an audacious suit with the Supreme Court challenging the election results". The New York Times. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  50. ^ Dwyer, Devin; Rubin, Olivia; Mosk, Matthew (December 9, 2020). "Trump and his GOP loyalists seek to pile on Supreme Court election challenge". ABC News. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  51. ^ Feldman, Noah (December 8, 2020). "Texas AG Asks the Supreme Court for a Coup". Bloomberg News. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  52. ^ Platoff, Emma (December 9, 2020). "Trump, Republicans pin hopes on Texas lawsuit to overturn election results, but legal experts say it's a long shot". The Texas Tribune. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  53. ^ Gerstein, Josh; Montellaro, Zach; Cheney, Kyle (December 8, 2020). "Supreme Court rejects bid to overturn Biden's win in Pennsylvania". Politico. from the original on December 8, 2020. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  54. ^ Gillman, Todd J. (December 11, 2020). "Texas stands ground at Supreme Court, rejecting 'seditious abuse' claim in bid to overturn Biden's election". The Dallas Morning News. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  55. ^ Wolfe, Jan; Shalal, Andrea (December 9, 2020). "Trump vows to intervene in Texas election case before Supreme Court". Reuters. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  56. ^ "President Trump's filing asking SCOTUS to block electors from four states". CNN. December 9, 2020. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  57. ^ de Vogue, Ariane; LeBlanc, Paul (December 10, 2020). "Trump asks Supreme Court to invalidate millions of votes in battleground states". CNN. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  58. ^ a b c Merchant, Nomaan; Richer, Alanna Durkin (December 11, 2020). "Hundreds of GOP members sign onto Texas-led election lawsuit". AP NEWS. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  59. ^ Bluestein, Greg (December 8, 2020). "Loeffler, Perdue side with Texas lawsuit that Georgia AG says is 'wrong'". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  60. ^ Schmitt, Eric [@Eric_Schmitt] (December 9, 2020). "Election integrity is central to our republic. And I will defend it at every turn" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  61. ^ Rutledge, Leslie [@AGRutledge] (December 8, 2020). "After reviewing the motion filed by Texas in the U.S. Supreme Court, I have determined that I will support the motion in all legally appropriate manners" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
  62. ^ Manning, Johnathan (December 8, 2020). "Louisiana AG throws support behind Texas election lawsuit". NBC KPLC News. Louisiana. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  63. ^ Diaz, Daniella. "Brief from 126 Republicans supporting Texas lawsuit in Supreme Court". CNN. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  64. ^ "List: The 126 House members, 19 states and 2 imaginary states that backed Texas' challenge to Trump defeat". The Mercury News. December 12, 2020. from the original on December 13, 2020. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
  65. ^ a b Everett, Burgess; Zanona, Melanie (December 11, 2020). "Senate Republicans shun House GOP bid to overturn the election". Politico. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  66. ^ Bluestein, Greg; Journal-Constitution, The Atlanta. "Trump warns Georgia AG not to rally other Republicans against Texas lawsuit". The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  67. ^ "George Conway: This is the most insane thing yet". CNN. December 8, 2020. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  68. ^ Merchant, Nomaan; Richer, Alanna Durkin (December 12, 2020). "Dismissed election case pushed debunked claims". Associated Press. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  69. ^ Blake, Aaron (December 11, 2020). "Can Trump's lawyers get in trouble for frivolous lawsuits?". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. from the original on December 13, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  70. ^ Mower, Lawrence (October 25, 2021). "Lawyers for Florida attorney general mocked lawsuit to overturn 2020 election". Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved October 24, 2022.
  71. ^ Romboy, Dennis (December 9, 2020). "Herbert, Cox condemn Utah A.G. Reyes joining Texas lawsuit challenging election". Deseret News. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 10, 2020.
  72. ^ Rutenberg, Jim; Corasaniti, Nick (December 12, 2020). "'An Indelible Stain': How the G.O.P. Tried to Topple a Pillar of Democracy". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  73. ^ "Jeb Bush blasts Texas lawsuit: 'This is crazy. It will be killed on arrival'". The Hill. December 10, 2020. from the original on March 2, 2021. Retrieved December 14, 2020.
  74. ^ Larson, Erik; Stohr, Greg (December 11, 2020). "Texas Stands by Claim That Biden Win Statistically Impossible". Bloomberg News. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  75. ^ Coy, Peter (December 11, 2020). "Understanding That 'One-in-a-Quadrillion' Claim About the Election". Bloomberg News. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  76. ^ Litke, Eric (December 9, 2020). "Lawsuit claim that statistics prove fraud in Wisconsin, elsewhere is wildly illogical". PolitiFact. from the original on December 10, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  77. ^ Post, David (December 9, 2020). "More on Statistical Stupidity at SCOTUS". Reason. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  78. ^ Bump, Philip (December 9, 2020). "Trump's effort to steal the election comes down to some utterly ridiculous statistical claims". The Washington Post. from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved December 9, 2020.
  79. ^ "READ: Supreme Court order on Texas election case". CNN. December 11, 2020. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  80. ^ The Editorial board (December 11, 2020). "The Republicans Who Embraced Nihilism – The Supreme Court thwarts the latest Trumpist attack on American democracy". The New York Times. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  81. ^ "Supreme Court rejects Texas lawsuit challenging Biden's election wins in 4 key states". CNBC. December 11, 2020. from the original on December 11, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  82. ^ "Supreme Court rejects Texas lawsuit to overturn Biden's election victory". The Boston Globe. Associated Press. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  83. ^ Platoff, Emma (December 11, 2020). "U.S. Supreme Court throws out Texas lawsuit contesting 2020 election results in four battleground states". Texas Tribune. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 11, 2020.
  84. ^ Axelrod, Tal (December 11, 2020). "Texas GOP chair floats secession for 'law-abiding states' after Supreme Court defeat". The Hill. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  85. ^ Lambe, Jerry (December 12, 2020). "'So Much For the Party of Lincoln': Head of Texas GOP Calls For State to Secede From the Union Following SCOTUS Loss". Law & Crime. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  86. ^ Jenkins, Cameron (December 12, 2020). "Trump slams Supreme Court decision to throw out election lawsuit". The Hill. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  87. ^ Mangan, Dan (December 12, 2020). "Trump blasts AG Barr over Hunter Biden probe secrecy, condemns Supreme Court order tossing election challenge". CNBC. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  88. ^ Semones, Evan (December 12, 2020). "Trump flays former allies, calls to 'fight on' after Supreme Court defeat". Politico. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  89. ^ Saul, Stephanie; Fandos, Nicholas (December 12, 2020). "Republicans Find Themselves Speechless Following a Supreme Court Defeat". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. from the original on March 5, 2021. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
  90. ^ Axelrod, Tal (December 11, 2020). "Biden team says it's 'no surprise' Supreme Court rejected Texas lawsuit". The Hill. from the original on December 13, 2020. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
  91. ^ Smith, David (December 12, 2020). "Supreme court rejects Trump-backed Texas lawsuit aiming to overturn election results". The Guardian. from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
  92. ^ "Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Rejecting GOP Election Sabotage Lawsuit" (Press release). Speaker Nancy Pelosi. December 11, 2020. from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
  93. ^ Williams, Jordan (December 11, 2020). "Democrat asks Pelosi to refuse to seat lawmakers supporting Trump's election challenges". The Hill. from the original on December 12, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2020.

External links edit

  • Motion filed by AG Paxton
  • Motion to expedite
  • Amicus brief filed by seventeen states
  • Amicus brief filed by 126 Republican members of the House of Representatives
  • Opposition to motion filed by AG Shapiro
  • Order dismissing the case

April 26, 2024
texas, pennsylvania, 2020, lawsuit, filed, united, states, supreme, court, contesting, administration, 2020, presidential, election, four, other, states, which, biden, defeated, incumbent, donald, trump, supreme, court, united, statesdecided, december, 2020ful. Texas v Pennsylvania 592 U S 2020 was a lawsuit filed at the United States Supreme Court contesting the administration of the 2020 presidential election in four other states in which Joe Biden defeated incumbent Donald Trump Texas v PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United StatesDecided December 11 2020Full case nameState of Texas v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania State of Georgia State of Michigan and State of WisconsinDocket no 22O155HoldingTexas lacks Article III standing to sue other states over how they conduct their own elections Case dismissed Court membershipChief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas Stephen Breyer Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor Elena Kagan Neil Gorsuch Brett Kavanaugh Amy Coney BarrettCase opinionPer curiamStatementAlito joined by ThomasLaws appliedU S Const art II 1 cl 2 art III Filed by Texas State Attorney General Ken Paxton on December 8 2020 under the Supreme Court s original jurisdiction Texas v Pennsylvania alleged that Georgia Michigan Pennsylvania and Wisconsin violated the United States Constitution by changing election procedures through non legislative means thus violating the independent state legislature theory The suit sought to temporarily withhold the certified vote count from these four states prior to the Electoral College vote on December 14 The suit was filed after about 90 lawsuits arising from disputes over the election results filed by Trump and the Republican Party had failed in numerous state and federal courts The suit had been drafted by a team of lawyers with ties to the Trump presidential campaign Paxton agreed to file the case after other state attorneys general declined to do so The Solicitor General of Texas Kyle D Hawkins objected to the suit and refused to let his name be added Paxton hired Lawrence J Joseph who had helped draft the suit as special counsel to assist with the suit 1 Within one day of Texas s filing Trump over 100 Republican Representatives and 18 Republican state attorneys general filed motions to support the case 2 3 Trump referred to this case as the big one of the election challenging lawsuits 4 Attorneys general for the defendant states joined in briefs submitted by their counterparts from twenty other states two territories and the District of Columbia 5 urged the Court to refuse the case with Pennsylvania s brief calling it a seditious abuse of the judicial process 6 Legal experts argued that the case was not likely to be heard and not likely to succeed if it did get heard and that it was thus a Hail Mary action 7 8 9 The Supreme Court issued orders on December 11 declining to hear the case on the basis that Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution to challenge the results of the election held by another state 10 11 Contents 1 Background 2 Filings 2 1 Procedure 2 2 Texas 2 3 Amici curiae respondents 2 3 1 Supporting plaintiff Texas 2 3 2 Supporting defendant states 2 3 3 Supporting both parties 2 3 4 Supporting neither party 3 Reactions to court filing 3 1 Law 3 2 Politics 3 2 1 In favor 3 2 2 Against 3 3 Statistical analysis 4 Outcome 5 Aftermath 6 See also 7 Footnotes 8 References 9 External linksBackground editMain articles Pre election and Post election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election Several states changed their voting laws prior to the 2020 United States presidential election to make postal voting easier due to fears that in person voting would expose people to COVID 19 Legal challenges to the changes were raised across the country A number of these cases involved voting regulations that were altered by states executive branches and not by state legislatures In Texas v Pennsylvania Texas claimed that such alterations violated Article Two of the United States Constitution 12 The initial tallies of votes completed within the week of election day showed that Joe Biden had won sufficient votes in the Electoral College to secure the presidency over incumbent Donald Trump Trump and the Republican National Committee RNC launched many lawsuits against swing states challenging their vote tallies particularly in states that had voted for Trump in the 2016 United States presidential election but had turned to Biden in 2020 such as Pennsylvania Michigan Wisconsin and Georgia Most of the cases raised by Trump and the RNC were dismissed on procedural grounds or rejected on substantive grounds in the courts and did not affect the projected Electoral College result 13 PolitiFact noted that the forces behind reversing the election had by this point lost dozens of election lawsuits 14 Before and after the election Trump stated his expectation that the Supreme Court would determine the outcome After the election his legal team sought to bring a case before the Court on which conservative justices including three appointed by Trump held a 6 3 majority 15 Filings editProcedure edit The case was filed on December 8 2020 directly with the Supreme Court as it holds original jurisdiction over disputes between states 16 17 18 Such cases are infrequent there were 123 original jurisdiction cases from 1789 to 1959 19 Original jurisdiction cases are immediately docketed pursuant to Rule 17 once the plaintiff submits its motion for leave to file and pays its docket fees 20 a Because the suit requested expedited consideration the Court set a deadline at 3 00 p m on December 10 for the four defendant states to respond 19 21 Whereas a typical case submitted through a writ of certiorari requires only four justices to accept to be certified by the Supreme Court this case would have required five justices 22 Texas edit See also Independent state legislature theory The suit was filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton It claimed that Georgia Michigan Pennsylvania and Wisconsin violated the Constitution by changing their election procedures to limit the spread of COVID 19 23 The case was filed on the same day as the safe harbor threshold beyond which Congress must accept certified results from states ahead of the Electoral College s official vote on December 14 2020 18 16 The suit alleged that the four states ignor ed statutory requirements as to how mail in ballots were received evaluated and counted 24 It further argued that electoral processes in the four defendant states suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities and therefore that it was not clear who legitimately won the 2020 election 25 In the lawsuit Texas alleged that the defendant states by changing their election processes violated three clauses of the Constitution the Electors Clause Article II Section 1 Clause 2 the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause 26 27 In particular it argued the Constitution requires changes to electoral procedures to be made only by state legislatures and not by executives such as secretaries of state 28 Accordingly it argued changes to election procedures made by executive action and not by alterations to state law rendered election results constitutionally infirm 28 Texas argued it had standing to sue to prevent its votes from becoming diluted 29 Texas instead alleged that fraud becomes undetectable because unlawful actions of election officials effectively destroy the evidence Whether voters committed fraud was not the constitutional issue in this case according to Texas Therefore Texas declared that it did not need to prove fraud 30 Texas sought relief by requesting the Supreme Court block those four states from voting in the electoral college and extend the deadline by which states must submit their certified vote 23 Texas in its December 11 response to the defendant states stated Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief 31 In an interview Paxton further argued that the only place we can file is the Supreme Court and we did what we did appropriately so to call it seditious is really ridiculous 32 In response to commentators who said the action was a Hail Mary Paxton said Unless you throw the pass you can t complete it 32 Amici curiae respondents edit nbsp Plaintiff Texas TX Defendants WI MI PA GA opposed Texas States with attorneys general filing in support of Texas States with attorneys general filing in support of the Defendant states The District of Columbia which is a federal district also filed in support as did Guam and the U S Virgin Islands two U S Territories States with attorneys general filing brief in support of neither side State with attorney general filing in support of Texas but the governor filing in support of the Defendant states Supporting plaintiff Texas edit Attorneys general of seventeen additional states filed a joint brief on December 9 supporting Texas 33 19 34 On the same day Trump filed a motion to intervene in his personal capacity thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff 35 Trump s brief was filed by Chapman University School of Law professor John C Eastman who in August 2020 authored an article published in Newsweek questioning Kamala Harris s eligibility for the position of vice president 36 On social media the president referred to the case as the big one 37 Over 120 Republican members of the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in support of the suit including leader Kevin McCarthy and his deputy Steve Scalise 38 39 40 106 members of the House initially signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff 41 20 additional members of the House signed on to the lawsuit in support of the plaintiff before it was dismissed 42 Later on December 10 attorneys general of six states that had already responded in an amicus brief Arkansas Utah Louisiana Missouri Mississippi and South Carolina petitioned to the Supreme Court to let them join Texas as a plaintiff in the case 43 This effort was led by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt 43 List of attorneys general supporting Texas Lynn Fitch Mississippi Tim Fox Montana Curtis Hill Indiana Mike Hunter Oklahoma Jeff Landry Louisiana Steve Marshall Alabama Ashley Moody Florida Patrick Morrisey West Virginia Doug Peterson Nebraska Jason R Ravnsborg South Dakota Sean D Reyes Utah Leslie Rutledge Arkansas Derek Schmidt Kansas Eric Schmitt Missouri Herbert H Slatery III Tennessee Wayne Stenehjem North Dakota Alan Wilson South Carolina List of 126 House of Representative members supporting Texas Ralph Abraham LA 05 Robert Aderholt AL 04 Rick Allen GA 12 Jodey Arrington TX 19 Brian Babin TX 36 Jim Baird IN 04 Jim Banks IN 03 Jack Bergman MI 01 Andy Biggs AZ 05 Gus Bilirakis FL 12 Dan Bishop NC 09 Mike Bost IL 12 Kevin Brady TX 08 Mo Brooks AL 05 Ken Buck CO 04 Ted Budd NC 13 Tim Burchett TN 02 Michael C Burgess TX 26 Bradley Byrne AL 01 Ken Calvert CA 42 Buddy Carter GA 01 Ben Cline VA 06 Michael Cloud TX 27 Doug Collins GA 09 Mike Conaway TX 11 Rick Crawford AR 01 Dan Crenshaw TX 02 Scott DesJarlais TN 04 Mario Diaz Balart FL 25 Jeff Duncan SC 03 Neal Dunn FL 02 Tom Emmer MN 06 Ron Estes KS 04 Drew Ferguson GA 03 Chuck Fleischmann TN 03 Bill Flores TX 17 Jeff Fortenberry NE 01 Virginia Foxx NC 05 Russ Fulcher ID 01 Matt Gaetz FL 01 Greg Gianforte MT AL Bob Gibbs OH 07 Louie Gohmert TX 01 Lance Gooden TX 05 Sam Graves MO 06 Mark Green TN 07 Morgan Griffith VA 09 Michael Guest MS 03 Jim Hagedorn MN 01 Andy Harris MD 01 Vicky Hartzler MO 04 Kevin Hern OK 01 Jody Hice GA 10 Clay Higgins LA 03 Trey Hollingsworth IN 09 Richard Hudson NC 08 Bill Huizenga MI 02 Bill Johnson OH 06 Mike Johnson LA 04 Jim Jordan OH 04 John Joyce PA 13 Fred Keller PA 12 Mike Kelly PA 16 Trent Kelly MS 01 Steve King IA 04 David Kustoff TN 08 Darin LaHood IL 18 Doug LaMalfa CA 01 Doug Lamborn CO 05 Robert E Latta OH 05 Debbie Lesko AZ 08 Billy Long MO 07 Barry Loudermilk GA 11 Blaine Luetkemeyer MO 03 Kenny Marchant TX 24 Roger Marshall KS 01 Kevin McCarthy CA 23 Tom McClintock CA 04 Cathy McMorris Rodgers WA 05 Dan Meuser PA 09 Carol Miller WV 03 John Moolenaar MI 04 Alex Mooney WV 02 Markwayne Mullin OK 02 Greg Murphy NC 03 Dan Newhouse WA 04 Ralph Norman SC 05 Steven Palazzo MS 04 Gary Palmer AL 06 Greg Pence IN 06 Scott Perry PA 10 Bill Posey FL 08 Guy Reschenthaler PA 14 Tom Rice SC 07 Mike Rogers AL 03 John Rose TN 06 David Rouzer NC 07 John Rutherford FL 04 Steve Scalise LA 01 Austin Scott GA 08 Mike Simpson ID 02 Adrian Smith NE 03 Jason T Smith MO 08 Ross Spano FL 15 Pete Stauber MN 08 Elise Stefanik NY 21 Greg Steube FL 17 Glenn Thompson PA 15 Tom Tiffany WI 07 Jeff Van Drew NJ 02 William Timmons SC 04 Ann Wagner MO 02 Tim Walberg MI 07 Mark Walker NC 06 Jackie Walorski IN 02 Michael Waltz FL 06 Randy Weber TX 14 Daniel Webster FL 11 Brad Wenstrup OH 02 Bruce Westerman AR 04 Roger Williams TX 25 Joe Wilson SC 02 Rob Wittman VA 01 Ron Wright TX 06 Ted Yoho FL 03 Lee Zeldin NY 01 Supporting defendant states edit An amicus curiae brief on the side of the defendants was filed by a group of former Republican office holders and officials 44 The defendant states responded on December 10 urging the Court to reject the case Pennsylvania s reply called the suit a seditious abuse of the judicial process 6 The states urged that the justices send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated 6 Attorneys general of the District of Columbia Guam the Virgin Islands and 20 states filed a brief in support of the defendant states the same day 5 45 List of attorneys general supporting the defendants Hector Balderas New Mexico Xavier Becerra California Leevin Taitano Camacho Territory of Guam Clare E Connors Hawaii Thomas J Donovan Vermont Keith Ellison Minnesota Robert W Ferguson Washington Aaron D Ford Nevada Aaron M Frey Maine Brian E Frosh Maryland Denise George U S Virgin Islands Gurbir S Grewal New Jersey Maura Healey Massachusetts Mark R Herring Virginia Letitia James New York Kathleen Jennings Delaware Peter F Neronha Rhode Island Karl Racine District of Columbia Kwame Raoul Illinois Ellen F Rosenblum Oregon Josh Stein North Carolina William Tong Connecticut Philip J Weiser Colorado Supporting both parties edit Although Montana Attorney General Tim Fox participated in the joint brief filed on December 9 supporting Texas 34 outgoing Montana Governor Steve Bullock filed a separate brief on December 10 in support of the defendants 46 Supporting neither party edit On December 10 Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a motion supporting neither side but stated that the s tates need this Court to decide at the earliest available opportunity the question whether the Electors Clause permits state courts and state executive officials to alter the rules by which presidential elections are conducted 47 Yost also stated Ohio could not support Texas s request for relief because Ohio s position is that state legislatures power over elections should not be overridden by federal courts 27 Arizona also filed a brief on jurisdiction but supporting neither party 5 Reactions to court filing editLaw edit The suit was criticized by legal experts and called outlandish 48 18 49 University of Texas School of Law law professor Stephen I Vladeck called the suit the craziest lawsuit filed to purportedly challenge the election Election law expert Rick Hasen characterized the lawsuit as a press release masquerading as a lawsuit and the dumbest case I ve ever seen filed on an emergency basis at the Supreme Court 50 49 Edward Foley director of the election law program at Ohio State University urged the court to ignore the case and refrain from interfering in the election 17 Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School described the 11th hour case a Hail Mary pass that was creative but unlikely to win because alleging that Texas instead of its voters was injured in order to bypass the Eleventh Amendment to the U S Constitution is far fetched he also expressed concern that the case was filed too late 9 Another Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman characterized the lawsuit as a coup attempt by Republicans to overturn the results of the election 51 Senator Ted Cruz who previously served as Solicitor General of Texas and argued several cases before the Court while serving in that capacity accepted Trump s request to argue the case should the Court hear it 52 Legal experts also did not expect the Supreme Court to certify the case given its reluctance to hear post election challenges On the same day as Texas s filing the Court refused to hear arguments in another post election challenge Kelly v Pennsylvania without any dissents 22 53 The defendants also argued that the legal principle of laches which may bar an action if it is filed too late is grounds for dismissing Texas s claim 31 54 b Politics edit In favor edit Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott signaled his support for the case saying the case tries to accelerate the process providing certainty and clarity about the entire election process The United States of America needs that 23 President Trump retweeted several tweets that expressed support for the suit 16 On December 9 he promised to intervene in the suit 55 and filed a motion to do so the same day 35 56 57 thereby attempting to join the case as a plaintiff On December 10 he tweeted the Supreme Court has a chance to save our Country from the greatest Election abuse in the history of the United States 58 On December 11 he tweeted I just want to stop the world from killing itself Now that the Biden Administration will be a scandal plagued mess for years to come it is much easier for the Supreme Court of the United States to follow the Constitution and do what everybody knows has to be done 4 Republican Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler both involved in close runoff races in Georgia voiced support for the suit 59 In a tweet Republican Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt stated his support for the suit promising to lead the effort in support of Texas s SCOTUS filing today 60 On Twitter Republican Arkansas attorney general Leslie Rutledge stated she would legally support the motion 61 Republican Louisiana attorney general Jeff Landry also supported the complaint 62 In response to an email to every Republican member of the House of Representatives from Representative Mike Johnson of Louisiana 125 Republicans joined him to sign an amicus brief supporting the suit 63 64 The number represented a clear majority of the Republican caucus in the House 4 Politico referred to the large number of GOP House members supporting the suit as jaw dropping 65 Republican members of the Senate on the other hand were much less likely to speak in favor of the suit reflecting their different temperaments and political imperatives 65 Against edit The office of Republican Georgia attorney general Chris Carr also criticized the suit and Paxton On December 8 Carr s spokeswoman said that Paxton was constitutionally legally and factually wrong about Georgia 49 24 Georgia s deputy secretary of state Jordan Fuchs denounced the suit as false and irresponsible 18 Trump warned Carr to not rally other Republican officials in opposition to the suit and the Republican majority in the Georgia State Senate expressed their approval for the filing 66 49 24 nbsp Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro pictured in 2019 criticized the suit Democratic Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel criticized the suit labelling it a publicity stunt beneath the dignity of the Texas attorney general office and saying t he erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn t attributable to the good people of Michigan Wisconsin Georgia or Pennsylvania but rather to partisan officials like Mr Paxton who place loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country 16 Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the case genuinely embarrassing 18 Pennsylvania attorney general Josh Shapiro stated that t hese continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless beyond reckless they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors 29 Attorney and Lincoln Project founder George Conway called the lawsuit the most insane thing yet 67 Former Federal Elections Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky said By almost any measure this is the legal equivalent of a Hail Mary pass 8 Chip Roy a Republican Texas congressman and former chief of staff to Texas senator Ted Cruz characterized the suit as a dangerous violation of federalism that sets a precedent to have one state asking federal courts to police the voting procedures of other states 68 Republican Texas senator and former Texas Supreme Court justice John Cornyn said he was unable to understand the legal theory behind the suit 69 Emails 70 from Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody s office revealed that lawyers in the office ridiculed the lawsuit as batshit insane and weird and speculated about Paxton s motivations for filing it Governor Gary Herbert and Governor elect Spencer Cox of Utah both Republicans denounced Republican Utah state attorney general Sean Reyes s decision to join the amicus brief in support of the lawsuit 71 Several other states also saw division among Republicans about whether coming out in favor of the suit was wise 58 The Associated Press wrote that the action has quickly become a conservative litmus test 58 Michael Steele formerly the chair of the Republican National Committee called Republican House members decision to join the suit an offense to the Constitution that would leave an indelible stain on their political skin 72 Jeb Bush opined on the suit This is crazy It will be killed on arrival 73 Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins who normally would speak on behalf of the state in matters before the Supreme Court was not listed on the suit 43 Statistical analysis edit The lawsuit included a declaration from economist Charles Cicchetti who claimed that his statistical analysis showed that there was a less than one in one quadrillion chance of Biden s having won any of the states in question Cicchetti s analysis was widely criticized 74 since it assumed that voters behaved the same in 2020 as they had in 2016 75 and because it assumed that vote tallying patterns were random over time In reality Biden was a different candidate than Hillary Clinton had been in 2016 and the marked shift of early Republican vote counts to later Democratic votes counts had been anticipated well in advance because several battleground states had forbidden mail in ballots from being counted earlier mail in ballots favored Biden in part because Trump had long attempted to discredit the reliability of mail in voting 6 Writing at PolitiFact Eric Litke described the analysis as wildly illogical citing professors of political science who described the analysis as ludicrous and statistical incompetence with one wrong assumption being that votes are all independently and randomly distributed 76 At The Volokh Conspiracy David Post described Cicchetti s analysis as idiotic because it was based on two blatantly false assumptions 1 that voters preferences had not changed since 2016 and 2 that party preferences did not differ between mail in and in person voters Post stated that Paxton s use of Cicchetti s work was unethical because Paxton had not mentioned Cicchetti s key assumptions 77 At The Washington Post Philip Bump said that the analysis in the lawsuit was utterly ridiculous noting that the 2016 results could not be extrapolated to 2020 because Biden was more popular than Clinton and because voters had become more polarized Bump also wrote that vote counting was not homogeneous with the blue shift phenomenon being entirely expected due to mail in ballots favoring Biden 78 Outcome edit nbsp Wikisource has original text related to this article Texas v Pennsylvania et al On December 11 in an unsigned ruling the court ruled that Texas lacked standing and denied the suit 79 80 81 82 The State of Texas s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections All other pending motions are dismissed as moot 11 83 Justice Alito joined by Justice Thomas disagreed with the ruling denying leave to file a bill of complaint but did not otherwise find for the plaintiffs He wrote that the Court is duty bound to hear the case referencing Thomas s dissent in Arizona v California 589 U S Feb 24 2020 In my view we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief and I express no view on any other issue 11 Aftermath edit nbsp Republican Party of Texas chairman Allen West pictured in 2011 alluded to secession after the court s decision After the Court declined to hear the case Allen West then chairman of the Republican Party of Texas suggested that law abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution 84 The statement was criticized by Illinois Republican Adam Kinzinger saying the call for secession was dangerous The Lincoln Project s George Conway and National Review editor Rich Lowry also criticized West s remarks stating they were unrepresentative of the Party of Lincoln 85 President Trump harshly criticized the Court s decision saying This is a great and disgraceful miscarriage of justice The people of the United States were cheated and our Country disgraced Never even given our day in Court 86 87 White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany echoed the notion that the case was never given a chance saying the justices hid behind procedure There s no way to say it other than they dodged 88 Paxton for his part said the decision was unfortunate 89 The Biden campaign said of the ruling The Supreme Court has decisively and speedily rejected the latest of Donald Trump and his allies attacks on the democratic process This is no surprise dozens of judges election officials from both parties and Trump s own attorney general have dismissed his baseless attempts to deny that he lost the election 90 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement that The Court has rightly dismissed out of hand the extreme unlawful and undemocratic GOP lawsuit to overturn the will of millions of American voters and admonished that Republicans must once and for all end their election subversion immediately Additionally she reprimanded House members who supported the lawsuit The 126 Republican Members that signed onto this lawsuit brought dishonor to the House Instead of upholding their oath to support and defend the Constitution they chose to subvert the Constitution and undermine public trust in our sacred democratic institutions 91 92 New Jersey Representative Bill Pascrell citing section three of the 14th Amendment called for Pelosi to not seat Republicans who signed the amicus curiae brief supporting the suit This proposal would have applied to nearly two thirds of the Republican representatives of the incoming 117th United States Congress Pascrell stated The text of the 14th Amendment expressly forbids Members of Congress from engaging in rebellion against the United States Trying to overturn a democratic election and install a dictator seems like a pretty clear example of that 93 See also edit nbsp United States portal nbsp Politics portal nbsp Law portal Electoral Count Act 1887 Bush v Gore 2000 Footnotes edit Rule 17 refers to Rule 17 of the rules of the Supreme Court of the United States See Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States PDF Supreme Court of the United States July 1 2019 p 17 Black s Law Dictionary defines laches as among other things a want of activity and diligence in making a claim or moving for the enforcement of a right particularly in equity which will afford ground for presuming against it or for refusing relief where that is discretionary with the court See Black Henry Campbell 1910 Black s Law Dictionary Saint Paul Minnesota West 692 via Wikisource LACHES Negligence consisting in the omission of something which a party might do and might reasonably be expected to do towards the vindication or enforcement of his rights The word is generally the synonym of remissness dilatoriness unreasonable or unexcused delay the opposite of vigilance and means a want of activity and diligence in making a claim or moving for the enforcement of a right particularly in equity which will afford ground for presuming against it or for refusing relief where that is discretionary with the court scan nbsp References edit Rutenberg Jim Becker Jo Lipton Eric Haberman Maggie Martin Jonathan Rosenberg Matthew Schmidt Michael S January 31 2021 77 Days Trump s Campaign to Subvert the Election The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Retrieved November 21 2021 Gillman Todd J December 9 2020 17 states and Trump join Texas request for Supreme Court to overturn Biden wins in four states The Dallas Morning News Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Liptak Adam December 8 2020 Texas files an audacious suit with the Supreme Court challenging the election results The New York Times Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b c Merchant Nomaan Richer Alanna Durkin Majority of Republican House members sign on to lawsuit asking Supreme Court to invalidate presidential election Chicago Tribune Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b c Hurley Lawrence December 10 2020 States assail bogus Texas bid to overturn U S election at Supreme Court Reuters Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b c d Cheney Kyle Montellaro Zach December 10 2020 Seditious abuse of the judicial process States reject Texas effort to overturn Biden s election Politico Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Texas tries Hail Mary to block election outcome SCOTUSblog December 8 2020 Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 a b Matthews Chris December 9 2020 Trump places hopes in longshot Texas lawsuit asking Supreme Court to overturn election results in 4 states Market Watch Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b Dershowitz Alan The Dershow December 9 2020 Trump Team Hail Mary amp Last Day to Save Brandon Bernard Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 via YouTube Liptak Adam December 11 2020 Supreme Court Rejects Texas Suit Seeking to Subvert Election The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 a b c Order in Pending Case PDF Supreme Court of the United States December 11 2020 Archived PDF from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Howe Amy December 8 2010 Texas tries Hail Mary to block election outcome SCOTUSblog Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Horton Jake December 9 2020 US election 2020 What legal challenges remain for Trump BBC Archived from the original on December 6 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Donald Trump has lost dozens of election lawsuits Here s why PolitiFact Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Multiple sources Trump thrusts Supreme Court pick into election turmoil AP News September 30 2020 Archived from the original on November 2 2020 Retrieved December 4 2020 Mason Jeff September 24 2020 Trump hedges on transferring power says election will end up at Supreme Court Reuters Archived from the original on September 27 2020 Retrieved December 4 2020 McCoy Kevin Wolf Richard Lawsuit by Trump allies challenging Pennsylvania election results reaches Supreme Court USA Today Archived from the original on December 8 2020 Retrieved December 4 2020 Trump faces tough road in getting Supreme Court to intervene AP News November 7 2020 Archived from the original on November 26 2020 Retrieved December 4 2020 Polantz Katelyn December 3 2020 With Trump and allies headed to the Supreme Court elections cases still dead on arrival CNN Archived from the original on December 8 2020 Retrieved December 4 2020 a b c d Brice Makini December 8 2020 Texas asks U S Supreme Court to help Trump upend election in long shot lawsuit Reuters Archived from the original on December 8 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b Wolf Richard December 8 2020 Texas AG asks Supreme Court to overturn Trump s losses in key states Don t hold your breath USA Today Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 a b c d e Higgins Tucker Breuninger Kevin December 8 2020 Texas sues four battleground states in Supreme Court over unlawful election results in 2020 presidential race CNBC Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 a b c Quinn Melissa December 9 2020 Texas sues over election results in battleground states Biden won CBS Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Rule 17 Procedure in an Original Action Legal Information Institute Archived from the original on November 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Bowden John December 9 2020 Trump asks Cruz to argue Texas case The Hill Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b de Vogue Ariane Berman Dan December 10 2020 Explaining the Supreme Court lawsuit from Texas and Trump challenging Biden s win CNN Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 a b c Platoff Emma December 8 2020 In new lawsuit Texas contests election results in Georgia Wisconsin Michigan Pennsylvania Texas Tribune Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 a b c Mosk Matthew Rubin Olivia Hosenball Alex Dwyer Devin December 8 2020 Supreme Court denies 1 pro Trump election case as another hits its doorstep ABC Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 Howe Amy December 11 2020 Justices throw out Texas lawsuit that sought to block election outcome SCOTUSblog Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Attorney General of Texas December 7 2020 Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint PDF Paragraphs 128 144 Archived PDF from the original on December 8 2020 a b Liptak Adam Peters Jeremy W December 11 2020 In Blistering Retort 4 Battleground States Tell Texas to Butt Out of Election The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b Larson Erik Stohr Greg December 8 2020 Trump Fans Embrace Texas Suit as Last Hope to Flip Election Bloomberg News Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Paxton claims the U S Constitution only grants state legislatures the authority to make changes to election laws and officials like secretaries of state who expanded mail in voting in response to the coronavirus pandemic largely did so illegally The Texas suit also says those states violated the equal protection clause by allowing Democratic leaning counties to restrict Republican poll watchers or accept ballots with minor errors a b Neidig Harper December 8 2020 Texas sues states Biden won in Supreme Court seeking to delay Electoral College vote The Hill Archived from the original on December 8 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Blake Aaron December 10 2020 The Trump team throws in the towel on proving voter fraud The Washington Post Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b Olson Tyler December 11 2020 Texas files reply brief in election suit at SCOTUS final step before justices issue order in blockbuster case Fox News Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b Parke Caleb December 11 2020 Texas AG Paxton rips Pa AG over lawsuit criticism To call it seditious is really ridiculous Fox News Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Several U S states back Texas bid to upend Biden election win at Supreme Court Reuters December 9 2020 Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b Brief of State of Missouri and 16 Other States as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff s Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint PDF United States Supreme Court December 9 2020 Archived PDF from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 a b Trump Donald December 9 2020 Motion to Intervene of Donald J Trump PDF supremecourt gov Archived PDF from the original on December 10 2020 Eastman John C August 12 2020 Some Questions for Kamala Harris About Eligibility Opinion Newsweek Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Geraghty Jim December 10 2020 A Generous and Forgiving Media Brought the Bidens to This Point The Corner National Review Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Zilbermints Regina December 10 2020 More than 100 House Republicans sign brief backing Texas lawsuit challenging election results The Hill Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Which Republicans support the Texas lawsuit challenging the election results Washington Post December 10 2020 Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 House Members Who Signed a Brief Asking the Supreme Court to Consider Overturning the Election ProPublica August 12 2015 Archived from the original on February 18 2021 Retrieved December 14 2020 Which Republicans support the Texas lawsuit challenging the election results The Washington Post December 10 2020 Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved January 7 2021 Baer Stephanie K December 10 2020 Here Are The Names Of 126 Members Of The House Who Refuse To Accept That Biden Won Buzzfeed News Archived from the original on March 2 2021 Retrieved January 7 2021 a b c Olson Tyler December 10 2020 Missouri 5 more states ask to join Texas Supreme Court election case against Georgia others Fox News Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Adler Jonathan H December 9 2020 Additional Filings in and Additional Thoughts on the Texas Election Suit The Volokh Conspiracy Reason Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Motion For Leave To File And Brief For The District Of Columbia And The States And Territories Of California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Guam Hawaii Illinois Maine Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota Nevada New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina Oregon Rhode Island Vermont Virginia U s Virgin Islands And Washington As Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendants And In Opposition To Plaintiff s Motion For Leave To File A Bill Of Complaint PDF United States Supreme Court December 10 2020 Archived PDF from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Motion for Leave to File and Brief of Steve Bullock in His Official Capacity as Governor of Montana as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendants PDF United States Supreme Court December 10 2020 Archived PDF from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Motion of State of Ohio for leave to file amicus brief submitted PDF supremecourt gov December 10 2020 Archived PDF from the original on December 10 2020 Stohr Greg Larson Erik December 8 2020 Trump Fans Embrace Texas Suit as Last Hope to Flip Election Bloomberg Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 a b c d Liptak Adam December 8 2020 Texas files an audacious suit with the Supreme Court challenging the election results The New York Times Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 Dwyer Devin Rubin Olivia Mosk Matthew December 9 2020 Trump and his GOP loyalists seek to pile on Supreme Court election challenge ABC News Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Feldman Noah December 8 2020 Texas AG Asks the Supreme Court for a Coup Bloomberg News Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Platoff Emma December 9 2020 Trump Republicans pin hopes on Texas lawsuit to overturn election results but legal experts say it s a long shot The Texas Tribune Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Gerstein Josh Montellaro Zach Cheney Kyle December 8 2020 Supreme Court rejects bid to overturn Biden s win in Pennsylvania Politico Archived from the original on December 8 2020 Retrieved December 8 2020 Gillman Todd J December 11 2020 Texas stands ground at Supreme Court rejecting seditious abuse claim in bid to overturn Biden s election The Dallas Morning News Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Wolfe Jan Shalal Andrea December 9 2020 Trump vows to intervene in Texas election case before Supreme Court Reuters Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 President Trump s filing asking SCOTUS to block electors from four states CNN December 9 2020 Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 de Vogue Ariane LeBlanc Paul December 10 2020 Trump asks Supreme Court to invalidate millions of votes in battleground states CNN Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 a b c Merchant Nomaan Richer Alanna Durkin December 11 2020 Hundreds of GOP members sign onto Texas led election lawsuit AP NEWS Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Bluestein Greg December 8 2020 Loeffler Perdue side with Texas lawsuit that Georgia AG says is wrong The Atlanta Journal Constitution Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Schmitt Eric Eric Schmitt December 9 2020 Election integrity is central to our republic And I will defend it at every turn Tweet via Twitter Rutledge Leslie AGRutledge December 8 2020 After reviewing the motion filed by Texas in the U S Supreme Court I have determined that I will support the motion in all legally appropriate manners Tweet via Twitter Manning Johnathan December 8 2020 Louisiana AG throws support behind Texas election lawsuit NBC KPLC News Louisiana Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Diaz Daniella Brief from 126 Republicans supporting Texas lawsuit in Supreme Court CNN Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 List The 126 House members 19 states and 2 imaginary states that backed Texas challenge to Trump defeat The Mercury News December 12 2020 Archived from the original on December 13 2020 Retrieved December 13 2020 a b Everett Burgess Zanona Melanie December 11 2020 Senate Republicans shun House GOP bid to overturn the election Politico Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Bluestein Greg Journal Constitution The Atlanta Trump warns Georgia AG not to rally other Republicans against Texas lawsuit The Atlanta Journal Constitution Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 George Conway This is the most insane thing yet CNN December 8 2020 Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Merchant Nomaan Richer Alanna Durkin December 12 2020 Dismissed election case pushed debunked claims Associated Press Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Blake Aaron December 11 2020 Can Trump s lawyers get in trouble for frivolous lawsuits The Washington Post ISSN 0190 8286 Archived from the original on December 13 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Mower Lawrence October 25 2021 Lawyers for Florida attorney general mocked lawsuit to overturn 2020 election Tampa Bay Times Retrieved October 24 2022 Romboy Dennis December 9 2020 Herbert Cox condemn Utah A G Reyes joining Texas lawsuit challenging election Deseret News Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 10 2020 Rutenberg Jim Corasaniti Nick December 12 2020 An Indelible Stain How the G O P Tried to Topple a Pillar of Democracy The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Jeb Bush blasts Texas lawsuit This is crazy It will be killed on arrival The Hill December 10 2020 Archived from the original on March 2 2021 Retrieved December 14 2020 Larson Erik Stohr Greg December 11 2020 Texas Stands by Claim That Biden Win Statistically Impossible Bloomberg News Retrieved December 12 2020 Coy Peter December 11 2020 Understanding That One in a Quadrillion Claim About the Election Bloomberg News Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Litke Eric December 9 2020 Lawsuit claim that statistics prove fraud in Wisconsin elsewhere is wildly illogical PolitiFact Archived from the original on December 10 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Post David December 9 2020 More on Statistical Stupidity at SCOTUS Reason Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 Bump Philip December 9 2020 Trump s effort to steal the election comes down to some utterly ridiculous statistical claims The Washington Post Archived from the original on December 9 2020 Retrieved December 9 2020 READ Supreme Court order on Texas election case CNN December 11 2020 Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 The Editorial board December 11 2020 The Republicans Who Embraced Nihilism The Supreme Court thwarts the latest Trumpist attack on American democracy The New York Times Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Supreme Court rejects Texas lawsuit challenging Biden s election wins in 4 key states CNBC December 11 2020 Archived from the original on December 11 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Supreme Court rejects Texas lawsuit to overturn Biden s election victory The Boston Globe Associated Press Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Platoff Emma December 11 2020 U S Supreme Court throws out Texas lawsuit contesting 2020 election results in four battleground states Texas Tribune Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 11 2020 Axelrod Tal December 11 2020 Texas GOP chair floats secession for law abiding states after Supreme Court defeat The Hill Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Lambe Jerry December 12 2020 So Much For the Party of Lincoln Head of Texas GOP Calls For State to Secede From the Union Following SCOTUS Loss Law amp Crime Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Jenkins Cameron December 12 2020 Trump slams Supreme Court decision to throw out election lawsuit The Hill Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Mangan Dan December 12 2020 Trump blasts AG Barr over Hunter Biden probe secrecy condemns Supreme Court order tossing election challenge CNBC Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Semones Evan December 12 2020 Trump flays former allies calls to fight on after Supreme Court defeat Politico Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 Saul Stephanie Fandos Nicholas December 12 2020 Republicans Find Themselves Speechless Following a Supreme Court Defeat The New York Times ISSN 0362 4331 Archived from the original on March 5 2021 Retrieved December 13 2020 Axelrod Tal December 11 2020 Biden team says it s no surprise Supreme Court rejected Texas lawsuit The Hill Archived from the original on December 13 2020 Retrieved December 13 2020 Smith David December 12 2020 Supreme court rejects Trump backed Texas lawsuit aiming to overturn election results The Guardian Archived from the original on January 9 2021 Retrieved December 13 2020 Pelosi Statement on Supreme Court Rejecting GOP Election Sabotage Lawsuit Press release Speaker Nancy Pelosi December 11 2020 Archived from the original on January 9 2021 Retrieved December 13 2020 Williams Jordan December 11 2020 Democrat asks Pelosi to refuse to seat lawmakers supporting Trump s election challenges The Hill Archived from the original on December 12 2020 Retrieved December 12 2020 External links editMotion filed by AG Paxton Motion to expedite Amicus brief filed by seventeen states Amicus brief filed by 126 Republican members of the House of Representatives Opposition to motion filed by AG Shapiro Order dismissing the case Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Texas v Pennsylvania amp oldid 1216974830, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.