SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
8,856
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: − + − + − Also, six states ([[Missouri]] as lead state, [[Arkansas]], [[Louisiana]], [[Mississippi]], [[South Carolina]] and [[Utah]]) have also sought leave to intervene as parties.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163322/20201210115500103_2020-12-10%20-%20Motion%20to%20Intervene%20and%20Proposed%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20-%20Final%20With%20Tables.pdf</ref> − − ===Amici in Support=== − Seventeen 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><ref>In addition to the six states who have also filed a joint motion to intervene, the other states are [[Alabama]], [[Florida]], [[Nebraska]] (which splits its electoral votes, one of which went to Biden), [[North Dakota]], [[Oklahoma]], [[Indiana]], [[Kansas]], [[Montana]], [[South Dakota]], [[Tennessee]] and [[West Virginia]].</ref> − − 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]]. − − Furthermore, a group of "Constitutional Attorneys" (the most notable being former [[Alabama]] Supreme Court Justice [[Roy Moore]]) have also sought leave to file in support.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163248/20201209163606702_TX%20v.%20PA%20Motion%20and%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf</ref> Their argument is that the Constitution sets a fixed day for the election, and that Congress' decision to allow absentee voting in cases of necessity was not intended to open the floodgates to allow voting months in advance, differing from state to state and even within a state. + + + + + − + − + − Later, 20 states (all but one of which voted for Biden) along with the [[District of Columbia]] and the Territories of [[Guam]] and the [[United States Virgin Islands]] (the latter which do not have any Electoral College representation) filed an amici in opposition.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163379/20201210144443769_Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20-%20Motion%20and%20Br.%20of%20Amici%20DC%20et%20al.pdf</ref><ref>The states which filed are [[California]], [[Colorado]], [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]], [[Hawaii]], [[Illinois]], [[Maine]] (which splits its electoral votes, one of which went to President Trump), [[Maryland]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Minnesota]], [[Nevada]] (another state which voted for Biden but is embroiled in controversy), [[New Jersey]], [[New Mexico]], [[New York]], [[North Carolina]] (which voted for President Trump, but who's leadership is primarily Democrat), [[Oregon]], [[Rhode Island]], [[Vermont]], [[Virginia]] and [[Washington State|Washington]].</ref> Line 30:
Line 26: − + − + − + − + − − − −
Texas v. Pennsylvania (view source)
Revision as of 21:06, December 10, 2020
, 21:06, December 10, 2020→Related Filings: reformat and add additional filings
==Related Filings==
==Related Filings==
===Intervention===
===Intervention===
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>
*President Trump:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No.%2022O155%20Original%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf</ref>
*Six states ([[Missouri]] as lead state, [[Arkansas]], [[Louisiana]], [[Mississippi]], [[South Carolina]] and [[Utah]]; all voted in the majority for President Trump):.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163322/20201210115500103_2020-12-10%20-%20Motion%20to%20Intervene%20and%20Proposed%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20-%20Final%20With%20Tables.pdf</ref>
===[[Amicus Curiae|Amici]] in Support===
*Seventeen states (all of which voted in the majority for President Trump, aled by [[Missouri]]):<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><ref>In addition to the six states who have also filed a joint motion to intervene, the other states are [[Alabama]], [[Florida]], [[Nebraska]] (which splits its electoral votes, one of which went to Biden), [[North Dakota]], [[Oklahoma]], [[Indiana]], [[Kansas]], [[Montana]], [[South Dakota]], [[Tennessee]] and [[West Virginia]].</ref>
*Attorney General Mark Brnovich of [[Arizona]] (which purportedly voted for Biden, and who's results were certified by [[RINO]] Governor Doug Ducey):<ref>https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/TX%20v%20PA%20Motion%20for%20Leave%20FINAL.pdf</ref><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]].</ref>
*A group of "Constitutional Attorneys" (the most notable being former [[Alabama]] Supreme Court Justice [[Roy Moore]]):ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163248/20201209163606702_TX%20v.%20PA%20Motion%20and%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf</ref>
*Over 100 [[Republican]] [[House of Representatives]] Members:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163403/20201210153048641_Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20106%20Representatives.pdf</ref>
===Amici in Opposition===
===Amici in Opposition===
A group of individuals (many of who previously served in Congress and are considered to be part of the [[Deep State]]) sought leave to file a brief in opposition, stating that the Court is not the proper forum to decide this issue.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163237/20201209155924009_2020-12-9%20Texas%20Scotus%20Amici%20Brief-%20FINAL.pdf</ref>
*A group of individuals (many of who previously served in Congress and are considered to be part of the [[Deep State]]):<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163237/20201209155924009_2020-12-9%20Texas%20Scotus%20Amici%20Brief-%20FINAL.pdf</ref>
*Twenty states (all but one of which voted for Biden) along with the [[District of Columbia]] and the Territories of [[Guam]] and the [[United States Virgin Islands]] (the latter which do not have any Electoral College representation):<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163379/20201210144443769_Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20-%20Motion%20and%20Br.%20of%20Amici%20DC%20et%20al.pdf</ref><ref>The states which filed are [[California]], [[Colorado]], [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]], [[Hawaii]], [[Illinois]], [[Maine]] (which splits its electoral votes, one of which went to President Trump), [[Maryland]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Minnesota]], [[Nevada]] (another state which voted for Biden but is embroiled in controversy), [[New Jersey]], [[New Mexico]], [[New York]], [[North Carolina]] (which voted for President Trump, but who's leadership is primarily Democrat), [[Oregon]], [[Rhode Island]], [[Vermont]], [[Virginia]] and [[Washington State|Washington]].</ref>
===Neutral Amici===
===Neutral Amici===
===Responses===
===Responses===
All four Defendant States filed motions in opposition to the suit, arguing various bases as to why relief should not be granted.
All four Defendant States filed motions in opposition to the suit, arguing various bases as to why relief should not be granted.
*Pennsylvania:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163367/20201210142206254_Pennsylvania%20Opp%20to%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20v.FINAL.pdf</ref>
Pennsylvania:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163367/20201210142206254_Pennsylvania%20Opp%20to%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20v.FINAL.pdf</ref>
*Michigan:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163387/20201210145404465_22O155%20Texas%20MI%20BIO%2012-10.pdf</ref>
*Georgia:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163383/20201210145849997_Georgia%20--%20Brief%20in%20Opposition.pdf</ref>
Michigan:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163387/20201210145404465_22O155%20Texas%20MI%20BIO%2012-10.pdf</ref>
*Wisconsin:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163393/20201210150111653_Brief.pdf</ref>
Georgia:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163383/20201210145849997_Georgia%20--%20Brief%20in%20Opposition.pdf</ref>
Wisconsin:<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163393/20201210150111653_Brief.pdf</ref>
==References==
==References==