Join our daily newsletter At The Bell to receive exclusive market insights
- President Donald Trump and 17 red states in the U.S. have backed Texas in a lawsuit to the Supreme Court to overturn the Trump campaign’s election loss
- The lawsuit, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, alleges that four battleground states should have their votes disqualified for changing voting rules amid the COVID-19 pandemic
- These states are Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin — all of which swung blue to Joe Biden
- The lawsuit claims the changes to the voting rules are unconstitutional and paved the way for election irregularities in various forms
- Nevertheless, legal scholars have branded the lawsuit “utter garbage”, “laughable” and “insane”
- The Supreme Court is yet to reveal whether it will accept the case or not
President Donald Trump and 17 red states in the U.S. have backed Texas in a lawsuit to the Supreme Court to overturn the Trump campaign’s election loss
The lawsuit was filed directly to the Supreme Court by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and alleged that several key states should have their votes disqualified as they changed their voting rules amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
The states in question are Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin — all of which swung blue to Joe Biden and helped him clinch the Presidential election.
According to the lawsuits, the changes to voting rules were unconstitutional and “opened the door to election irregularities in various forms”.
States joining Texas in the plea to the Supreme Court include Missouri, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, South Carolina, Utah, and more.
President Trump has shown his support for the lawsuit on Twitter, and reports have surfaced that he is trying to join the lawsuit himself.
“This is the big one. Our country needs a victory!” President Trump said on Twitter.
Wow! At least 17 States have joined Texas in the extraordinary case against the greatest Election Fraud in the history of the United States. Thank you!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 9, 2020
What is the lawsuit about?
The lawsuit is not attempting to change the numbersof the votes from early November, but rather to invalidate the votes in the four states altogether.
These states account for 62 total electoral college votes, which is still not enough to put Trump ahead of Joe Biden — Biden has amassed 306 electoral college votes compared to Trump’s 232.
However, the lawsuit will pave the way to appoint pro-Trump electors to the electoral college in these states, which could ultimately turn the votes in Trump’s favour.
Attorney General Paxton is accusing Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin of destroying trust in the election system and compromising the integrity of the 2020 election.
“The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution,” the Attorney General said.
“By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections,” he added.
“Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error,” the AG concluded.
Can the case succeed?
While only the Supreme Court can decide if the case will even be heard, lawmakers across the States are throwing doubt over if Texas and the other 17 states even have anything concrete.
Josh Douglas, a Professor in election law and voting rights at the University of Kentucky College of Law, called the lawsuit “insane”.
Legal scholar Rick Hasen has called the case “utter garbage”.
Other legal scholars have been reported by a Reuters analysis to have called the case “absurd”, “laughable”, and “outlandish”.
Of course, the Supreme Court could still decide to hear the case at which point Texas and the supporting states will need to present their evidence.
However, Jonathan Adler — a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Ohio — said the precedent that could be set by the Supreme Court upending the election could be too much of a risk.
“My view is that the justices would be very, wary of opening that can of worms,” he told Reuters.
The Supreme Court is yet to respond to the lawsuit.
