Texas files suit in the Supreme Court over election | Eastern North Carolina Now

    This could be the case that tops all of the elections litigation. It puts the issue squarely before the Supreme Court. While the court has discretion whether to hear the case or not it is hard to imagine, considering the importance of the issue, that the SCOTUS would not hear it. It is important also for future cases that might turn on the legitimate "rule making" authority in election reform. Texas argues that it is the legislature that has exclusive authority to make election law and that would short circuit these Federal judges and executive branch officials making or changing election rules.

    Here is how Breitbart.com reports on the case:

    The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution.

    Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

    Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:

    Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effect-they made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.

    This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States' election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens' vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.

    Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states.

    Click here to go to the original source where you will find a link to the actual filing in Texas v. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin.