 |
| Daniel Slim/AFP via Getty Images |
A group of Republicans in Pennsylvania on Tuesday has again urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up their lawsuit that challenges the 2020 election results in the state.
The nation’s top court had previously rejected the group’s request for immediate injunctive relief to block Pennsylvania from taking further steps to certify the 2020 election results. At the time, the group’s lawyer, Greg Teufel, said the case was not over because his clients were planning to file a formal petition to ask the court to review the lawsuit, which they hadn’t filed the first time.
The lawyer filed a petition for a writ of certiorari on Dec. 11, docketed by the court on Dec. 15, which argues that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was wrong when it dismissed their case because the justices thought the plaintiffs filed their case with unreasonable delay.
“This Court should not turn a blind eye to unconstitutional election laws that permit massive vote dilution and have a significant impact on election outcomes, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did,” the petition (pdf) states. --->READ MORE HERE
The Electoral College may have made Joe Biden president-elect on Monday, but President Trump plans to dispute that outcome well into January.
"Yesterday was one step in the constitutional process," White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters on Tuesday. And, citing a series of election lawsuits in which the president is still involved, McEnany added that Trump's legal team is doing well to pursue "legitimate litigation" as long as those avenues are open.
For many of Trump's allies, the expiration date for success falls several weeks before Inauguration Day. Instead, they look to Jan. 6 as the day of "ultimate significance." Congress on that day will count and certify the Electoral College votes. After that point, a Trump-driven election reversal is all but impossible.
Trump lawyers have bandied about the term "ultimate significance" with greater regularity since the lawsuit led by Texas to overturn the results in four states failed, arguing that it provides state legislatures several weeks to undo the results sent on Monday to the Electoral College. Rudy Giuliani, Trump's top legal adviser, referenced it almost immediately after the Supreme Court tossed the Texas case. And this week, in a statement to the Washington Examiner, Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis cited it as guiding precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in its 2000 Bush v. Gore decision. The term originated from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent in that case. --->READ MORE HEREFollow links below to related stories and opinions:
Dominion Audit: Ballot Error Rate Was At Least 85,000 Times Higher Than FEC Allows
Georgia’s Audit of Ballot Signatures
Z GOP Chair: When 30% of Democrats Think the Election Was Stolen from Trump, You Know Something's Wrong
Horowitz: Stunning revelations of Dominion fraud alleged from Antrim County audit. GOP yawns
Election was 'in many ways stolen,' Rand Paul says: 'The courts never looked at the facts'
Lawsuit over absentee ballots filed in Georgia runoff elections
OANN won't recognize Biden as president-elect until Congress certifies Electoral College
Trump tells McConnell 'too soon to give up' on election
New York Times Attacks Election Skeptics
Cal Thomas: The 'Stolen' Election Isn't Just About Ballots - It's About Censorship and Suppression
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
No comments:
Post a Comment