States tell justices to deny Texas request to overturn 2020 election

[Elderberry]

SCOTUSblog by Amy Howe 12/10/2020

Four states – Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – urged the Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon to reject Texas’ efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Using strong language rarely seen in Supreme Court filings, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro told the justices that they should “not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated.”

The filings came in the lawsuit that Texas is seeking to file directly in the Supreme Court, a process known as original jurisdiction, attempting to delay the Electoral College vote and prevent the four states from casting their Electoral College votes for President-elect Joe Biden. The briefs filed on Monday by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton contend that the 2020 election “suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities in those four states,” making it impossible to know who “legitimately won the 2020 election.”

Numerous lower courts and election authorities in the states at issue have found no evidence of fraud, illegality or any other election problems that would cast doubt on the results.

President Donald Trump on Wednesday asked the justices for permission to join the Texas lawsuit, arguing that “nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen.” And on Thursday morning, six more states – Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina and Utah – requested approval to join, telling the court that they “share” the concerns voiced by Trump and Texas “about the unconstitutional administration of the Presidential election in the Defendant States, and its impact on voters in” their own states.

More: https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/12/states-tell-justices-to-deny-texas-request-to-overturn-2020-election/

[skeeter]

Wasn't there something about another 18 states participating in this lawsuit?

[Elderberry]

SCOTUSblog

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/12/states-tell-justices-to-deny-texas-request-to-overturn-2020-election/

Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin filed four separate briefs, but common themes emerged among all four. First, the states stressed, Texas’ lawsuit does not fall within the narrow category of cases in which the Supreme Court should exercise its original jurisdiction. Among other things, the states noted, there is another forum to resolve these disputes, as evidenced by the fact that courts around the country have repeatedly considered and rejected similar claims about the 2020 election. And if the Supreme Court were to exercise its original jurisdiction here, the states warned, its docket would be flooded with election-law disputes every four years in perpetuity.

[Elderberry]

Wasn't there something about another 18 states participating in this lawsuit?

They filed    Amicus briefs supporting Texas.

[skeeter]

They filed    Amicus briefs supporting Texas.

So they're providing support and allowing Texas to advance the case on their behalf. The media are determined to avoid mention of anyone other than Texas.

Just for my info what other legal options were available to them if they wanted to somehow participate in the suit?

[Elderberry]

PENNSYLVANIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

STATEMENT OF THE CASE


ARGUMENT

I.Texas’s Claims Do Not Meet the Exacting Standard Necessary for the Court to Exercise its Original Jurisdiction

II.Texas Does Not Present a Viable Case and Controversy

A.Texas lacks standing to bring this action

B.This untimely action is moot

III.Texas Fails to State a Constitutional Violation

A.Texas does not assert a meritorious Electors Clause claim

B.Texas has no basis for any Equal Protection or Due Process Claim against Pennsylvania

IV.Texas is Not Entitled to the Extraordinary Preliminary Injunction it Seeks

A.Texas cannot meet the high standard for injunctive relief

B.Texas’s request to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters who reasonably relied upon the law at the time of the election does great damage to the public interest

CONCLUSION.

[Elderberry]

So they're providing support and allowing Texas to advance the case on their behalf. The media are determined to avoid mention of anyone other than Texas.

Just for my info what other legal options were available to them if they wanted to somehow participate in the suit?

Maybe someone knows.