Changes

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]].

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 filed 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.

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.

===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]]) filed 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]]) 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>

 

 

Pennsylvania filed its motion in opposition, arguing that Texas has no basis for its suit.<ref>https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163367/20201210142206254_Pennsylvania%20Opp%20to%20Bill%20of%20Complaint%20v.FINAL.pdf</ref>

==References==

==References==