They are asking the Supreme Court to issue an emergency order invalidating the votes of millions of voters in the four war-torn states of Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania – although there is no evidence of widespread fraud. Critics of the president and his allies say the case reflects a bold and legitimate skepticism to pursue the case to prolong unsubstantiated claims that President-elect Joe Biden’s victory was somehow illegal. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed the lawsuit Tuesday. The president filed a resolution Wednesday to intervene – basically a request to join the case, asking for the same decision. Seventeen GOP states also support the initiative. What do Republicans want? Importantly, the election needs to be changed for Trump. They are asking the court to bar voters from Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, pushing Piton back to the Magic by a total of 270-votes. The court must first allow Paxton to file a lawsuit. The court must withhold the certificate of electoral college voting, determine whether all four states allowed a massive “illegal” vote, and have the states reconsider their vote count and then resubmit the numbers. Trump’s filing courtesy suggests that state legislatures decide who wins each state or who throws the entire election to each state House of Representatives, which has one vote – and that Trump will win because Republican representatives outnumber Democrats. Is there any prototype? No. “In short, the president is asking the Supreme Court to use its rare jurisdiction to effectively thwart the entire election,” said Steve Vladek, a CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor of law at the University of Texas. There are 6 conservatives in the Supreme Court. Does that guarantee that Trump will win? No. The court has so far shown no interest in interfering in the presidential election. On Tuesday, it rejected a request from the Pennsylvania Republicans. It issued a sentence and noted zero opposition. (Judges do not always have to make their votes public.) Trump has publicly suggested that he hopes his candidates, Amy Connie Barrett, Brett Kavanagh and Neil Korsch, will side with him in any election dispute. Conservative judges Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are also to be seen. No justice is required to exclude him or himself from controversy; Barrett, in particular, did not reconsider himself in the Pennsylvania case. When will we hear from the court? The Supreme Court will follow standard procedure ethics and will keep the case on board until the four warring states respond by 3pm on Thursday .The court may act upon the arrival of those cases or wait until Texas responds briefly to the warring states’ arguments. Judges acted swiftly in dismissing the Pennsylvania case on Tuesday, but they could set aside their time as they do in other election-related cases. Now they “meet” on Friday for a regular conference held over the phone. Unlike a traditional certification petition (the court must hear a case), it takes five judges to allow Paxton to file its case. What then? If the court refuses to sue, it’s another nail in the coffin for Trump’s hope to turn his election loss around. If it works in a different direction, it will be another dramatic and unprecedented turn in the 2020 election, which guarantees that the president will continue to challenge Biden’s victory. What is the original jurisdiction? Paxton seeks to file lawsuits against other states, in which case he is allowed to appear directly before the Supreme Court, dealing with so-called “original jurisdiction” cases that deal closely with border disputes, such as border disputes or water rights cases. To intervene in this case, it basically uses the legal courts of Texas. But when using the shortcut to the Texas Supreme Court, judges must acknowledge that it cannot be resolved in other courts – for example, federal or state courts “have nothing unique in the claims of Texas here, most of which have already been brought in other cases against the same four states,” Vladek said. He noted that it could weaken if Trump and other states merge. The Texas case is unique. Judges may be wary of opening flood gates to all political conflicts between states. Benjamin Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election legal expert and CNN contributor, told CNN on Wednesday. I don’t think the court will consider taking up “an immediate” case. GOP was “a party to the rights of the states,” Ginsberg said. “I can not imagine someone less confident in the principle of state rights than the Texas Attorney General trying to tell other states how to conduct their elections.” Sen. John Corn, a senior Republican from Texas, told CNN: “I openly struggle to understand its legal doctrine. First, why should even one large state like Texas tell a state about how other states are governed? Elections? We have a scattered and scattered system. , Although we do not like it, they may think it is unfair that they are determined at the state and local levels, not at the national level. ”What evidence is there for Trump and Republicans? The case involves several of the same claims that state and federal courts have rejected over time and over the past month regarding voter fraud and the legitimacy of mail-in voting. “A fair use of the Govt-19 epidemic,” Paxton wrote, “authorities on the battlefield have usurped the power of their legislatures and unconstitutionally amended their state’s electoral laws.” He said they did so through “executive Fiat”. He specifically pointed to the mail-in ballots, which were said to have been placed in “drop boxes” with a “small or unprotected chain” which weakened the signature verification and witness requirements, which called for “strong security measures to protect the integrity of the party.” “The president has been making increasingly distrustful appeals and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about the theft of his second term for weeks.” Failed. “Seventeen GOP-led states are with Texas and the president: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, West Dakota, Tennessee, Tennessee. Who are Trump’s new lawyers? The presidential campaign is being represented by former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and lawyer Jenna Ellis. However, in the current movement, Trump is being represented by John Eastman, who is known for proposing a racist conspiracy theory – and Trump’s successor was later multiplied by Trump. The parents are immigrants, and Trump asked Texas’ GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, the state’s former solicitor general, to represent him in the Supreme Court during oral arguments. Tapper, Christine Wilson, Manu Raju and Daniel Dias contributed to this report. .
Source