Changes

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.  By doing so, it has denied the voters of Texas [[due process]] and [[equal protection]] by allowing states to change their election laws without legislative consent for the benefit of a preferred political candidate.

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.  By doing so, it has denied the voters of Texas [[due process]] and [[equal protection]] by allowing states to change their election laws without legislative consent for the benefit of a preferred political candidate.

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>

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<ref>Act 77 is itself controversial in that the Pennsylvania Constitution strictly limits who can vote absentee; the suit presumes the Act to be valid but that notwithstanding the controversy surrounding it, non-legislative actors revised it nonetheless to suit their interests.</ref>, 2) the suit should be barred on the doctrine of [[laches]] (since in their opinion the suit should have been filed ''before'' the election)<ref>However, the suit alleges that poll workers were barred from observing the results, which by definition could not have taken place prior to the election.</ref>, 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>As a suit filed at the Court itself, the Circuit Courts of Appeal wouldn't hear the case in the first instance.</ref><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, 17 states (all of which voted in the majority for President Trump, and located in the South, West, and Midwest, led by [[Missouri]]) 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>  Then, Attorney General Mark Brnovich of [[Arizona]] (which purportedly voted for Biden, and who's results were certified by [[RINO]] Governor Doug Ducey) has also sought leave to file his own amicus curiae brief in the matter<ref>https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/TX%20v%20PA%20Motion%20for%20Leave%20FINAL.pdf</ref>; Brnovich and Arizona are involved in a separate suit against the Democratic National Committee arguing in a matter involving Section 2 of the [[Voting Rights Act]].

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, 17 states (all of which voted in the majority for President Trump, and located in the South, West, and Midwest, led by [[Missouri]]) 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>  Then, Attorney General Mark Brnovich of [[Arizona]] (which purportedly voted for Biden, and who's results were certified by [[RINO]] Governor Doug Ducey) has also sought leave to file his own amicus curiae brief in the matter<ref>https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/TX%20v%20PA%20Motion%20for%20Leave%20FINAL.pdf</ref>; Brnovich and Arizona are involved in a separate suit against the Democratic National Committee arguing in a matter involving Section 2 of the [[Voting Rights Act]].