Changes

'''[[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.

'''[[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

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 shortly after it was filed and the defendants were given until 3PM EST on December 10 to respond.

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.

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.