After another rejection in the Pennsylvania courts, Republicans again asked the US Supreme Court Thursday to block President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in a coastal state, while state attorneys say the fatal flaws in the original case mean the judges are unlikely to award it.
US Republican Rep. Mike Kelly of northwest Pennsylvania and other prosecutors from the Supreme Court are asking to prevent the state from ratifying any contests from the November 3 election, and to revoke any testimonies already filed, such as Biden’s victory, while her lawsuit is being considered.
They contend that Pennsylvania’s expansionary mail-vote bill is unconstitutional because it requires a constitutional amendment to allow its provisions.
However, in a sign that the case was too late to affect the elections, Judge Samuel Alito ordered state attorney to respond by December 9, a day after the so-called “safe haven deadline”.
“The timing is important here,” says Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine.
“Any final voter list decision is made in a state through the so-called“ safe haven deadline ”under the Federal Electoral Counting Act. Congress has the right to categorically accept it as valid,” Hassen wrote in his blog about election law. This year is the deadline [December 8]. The electors vote themselves on December 14th. By setting the deadline for a response of December 9, this means that the Supreme Court will not act until after the safe haven deadline has expired, making the likelihood of the Supreme Court abolishing the lowest in Pennsylvania. “
Biden beat President Donald Trump by more than 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania, the state that Trump won in 2016. Democrats submitted most of the ballots by mail.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed the case on Saturday. Kelly’s attorneys sought an injunction Tuesday in the US Supreme Court, then withdrew it while asking the state Supreme Court to withhold any ratifications until the US Supreme Court makes a decision. State judges dismissed the case on Thursday, and Kelly’s lawyers quickly reinstated the case in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In state courts, judges have cited the 180-day time limit in the law to file legal challenges on its rulings, as well as the staggering demand that an entire election be canceled retroactively.
In addition to challenging the state’s mail-in voting law, Kelly’s attorneys question whether state judges have violated their clients ’constitutional rights by dismissing the case on the basis of time limits and preventing them from reconsidering it on the same grounds.
Trump’s frantic effort in the courts to delegitimize the election he lost in a month has come close to backfire.
Lawyers for Trump and his allies have asked judges in several states to take the drastic and unprecedented step of nullifying Biden’s victories.
But the amount of statements, lawsuits and allegations made by Trump belie that they are false or often repeated to arguments already rejected by judges and election officials, some of them Republicans.
Here’s a look at the legal action stance in other key cases:
A judge opened a trial that began Thursday, brought by state Republican President Kelly Ward, alleging irregularities in verification of the authenticity of the mail ballot papers. The judge allowed Ward’s attorney and experts to compare the signatures on 100 email envelopes with the signatures on file to determine if there were any wrongdoing. Ward’s attorneys found two problems: One person’s vote for Trump was eventually recorded as a vote for Biden, and another person’s vote for Trump was canceled because the ballot contained votes for both Trump and a written candidate.
The courts there have already dismissed four other cases. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, Republican, validated the Arizona results on Monday. In a symbolic touch, he refused a phone call from Trump while signing the certification papers. Attorney Sydney Powell, who was recently fired from Trump’s legal team and promoted wild conspiracy theories about the elections, also filed a lawsuit there.
Six cases brought by Trump and his Republican allies in Michigan were either dismissed or dismissed. On Wednesday, Giuliani appeared at a public meeting with lawmakers and urged activists to pressure, and even threaten, the Republican-controlled legislature for an “escalation” and award Trump’s 16 electoral mandate votes despite Biden winning 154,000 votes.
On Thursday, the state Supreme Court refused to hear Trump’s lawsuit seeking to reverse his loss in that battlefield state. In a split decision, the court did not rule on the merits of the claims but said the case must first work its way through the lower courts. Trump wants to disqualify more than 221,000 ballot papers in the state’s two largest Democratic districts, claiming irregularities in the way the absentee ballots are administered. Urging the Supreme Court to hear the case, Trump’s attorneys said they did not have time to begin the trial in a lower court.
Trump’s attorney, Jim Tropez, said he will promptly take the case in circuit court and is expected to return to the Supreme Court “very soon.”
The Trump campaign filed a similar lawsuit in federal court Wednesday. Two other cases brought by the Conservatives are still pending before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Powell also filed a lawsuit seeking an order to certify the state’s election results.
Zombie specialist. Friendly twitter guru. Internet buff. Organizer. Coffee trailblazer. Lifelong problem solver. Certified travel enthusiast. Alcohol geek.