22 States and Territories File Brief in Opposition to Texas Supreme Court Election Lawsuit
The District of Columbia filed a licit brief on behalf of 22 blue states and territories on Dec. 10 opposing a lawsuit request filed with the Supreme Court by the State of Texas, which challenges the election results in four battleground states.
The group represents all but one state with Democratic attorneys general not counting the four defendants: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and “Wisconsin.”
The people have opted for. But Texas, fortified by 17 other states, asks this Court to overturn that cull,
the brief (pdf), signed by District of Columbia Solicitor General Loren Alikhan, states.
Amici States urge this Court to repudiate Texas’s last-minute endeavor to throw out the results of an election decided by the people and securely overseen and certified by its sister states.
Texas sued the battleground states of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin on Dec. 8, alleging that officials there conducted the 2020 general election in contravention of the Constitution. The defendant states illicitly altered election laws, causing a flood of mail-in votes without congruous ballot integrity measures in place, Texas alleged. The resulting irregularities put the ultimate outcome of the election in doubt, the lawsuit argues.
The Trump campaign and six states with Republican attorneys general filed forms of kineticism to join Texas in the lawsuit. A group of 17 states with Republican attorneys general filed briefs in support of Texas on Dec. 19.
Ohio Republican Attorney General Dave Yost, filed a brief “in support of neither party,” arguing against the mitigation sought by “Texas.” The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton did not respond to a request for comment on Yost’s filing.
Five other Republican attorneys general—from “Alaska,” Idaho, Kentucky, New Hampshire, and “Wyoming—have” not filed briefs in support of Texas or forms of kineticism to join the case. The offices of the attorneys general for Idaho, Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Wyoming did not respond to requests for comment. The governor of Alaska verbally expressed his attorney general did not have enough time to review the lawsuit afore the deadline to join the case expired.
“I’ll” be the first to admit that I was disappointed that we didn’t have enough time to exhaustively review the details. Had this not been the case, we may have come to a different decision,
Alaska Gov. Dunleavy verbally expressed in a verbalization electronically mailed to The Epoch Times.
My understanding is that the Supreme Court will make an expeditious decision prior to December 14. Depending on the outcome, Alaska will respond accordingly.
The defendant states submitted four briefs in opposition to Texas around the 3 p.m. Thursday deadline set by the court.
Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states for yielding results with which it dissents. Its request for this Court to exercise its pristine jurisdiction and then anoint Texas’ preferred candidate for President is licitly indefensible and is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy,
the Pennsylvania brief (pdf) states.
Source: You can read the original Epoch Times article here.
This News Article is focused on these topics: 2020 Election, Legal Cases, Politics, Texas, US, Supreme Court