Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
3,302 bytes added ,  00:01, December 10, 2020
new page
'''[[Texas]] v. [[Pennsylvania]]''' (official style: '''State of Texas v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State of [[Georgia]], State of [[Michigan]], and State of [[Wisconsin]]''') is a [[United States Supreme Court]] case filed on December 8, 2020 by Texas Attorney General [[Ken Paxton]], seeking relief in the ongoing 2020 United States Presidential Election.

The filing was quite unexpected: Texas is a fairly solid Republican state and (despite polls to the contrary) voted in the majority for President [[Donald Trump]], and was not involved in any significant controversy in the conduct of its election (in fact, the Texas Secretary of State refused to certify any of the [[Dominion Voting Systems]] machines for use in the election due to its own testing, which found significant issues with potential hacking). As the matter involves one sovereign state suing another (or four, in this case), the Supreme Court has not only original jurisdiction, but exclusive jurisdiction (i.e. the suit could not be filed in a Federal District Court). The case was docketed

Unlike the many other cases which contained allegations of fraud (e.g. ballot stuffing, secret algorithms in the voting machine software), the Texas case centered on the Electors Clause of the [[United States Constitution]], specifically that the Legislatures of each State have the sole province of determining how Presidential Electors are chosen (and, by extension, the election laws of the state). Texas argued that the actions taken by members of the Executive and Judicial branches (by "amending" electoral laws, either by "settlements" of "friendly lawsuits" filed by partisan organizations, or unilateral changes under the guise of a "public health emergency" from the COVID-19 pandemic), not ratified by the Legislatures of those states, violate the Electors Clause.

Pennsylvania has already hinted that its arguments will include: 1) the filing doesn't address Act 77, a 2019 bill which allowed state-wide voting by mail, 2) the suit should be barred on the doctrine of [[laches]] (since in their opinion the suit should have been filed ''before'' the election), and 3) the case at hand wouldn't result in a "circuit split" (the possibility that two different Circuit Courts of Appeal may rule differently), one of the factors that the Court considers when deciding to hear a case.<ref>https://www.zerohedge.com/political/texas-sues-georgia-michigan-pennsylvania-and-wisconsin-supreme-court-over-election</ref>

President Trump has sought leave to intervene as a party in interest in the case.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No.%2022O155%20Original%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf</ref> In addition, no fewer than 17 states (all of which voted in the majority for President Trump, and located in the South, West, and Midwest) have sought leave to file an ''amicus curiae'' brief in the case.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163215/20201209144840609_2020-12-09%20-%20Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Missouri%20et%20al.%20-%20Final%20with%20Tables.pdf</ref>

==External Link==
*[https://www.scribd.com/document/487348469/TX-v-State-Motion-2020-12-07-FINAL#from_embed Original Filing]

[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
8,856

edits

Navigation menu