Supreme Court Rejects Texas Lawsuit Challenging Results in 4 Key Swing States

The US Supreme Court has rejected the Texas lawsuit that challenged election results in 4 key swing states. The news comes after the case earned broad support from Republican lawmakers and 18 other states.

The lawsuit argued that Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia broke trust with other states and violated laws by allowing widespread mail-in balloting without verification measures in place. 

It was considered the most significant attempt to challenge the election outcome, and a majority of Republican members of the US House of Representatives had just signed on to support the case. 

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said they wanted to hear the case. Both have said previously the court does not have the authority to turn away lawsuits between states. 

Here's the official statement from the Supreme Court:

The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

On Thursday, six states had officially joined the case as plaintiffs, including Missouri, Arkansas, Utah, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina. 

Other states that have supported the effort include Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia. Arizona filed a separate brief in support. Read the entire amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court here.

President Trump's campaign also officially joined the case on Wednesday. And 126 of 196 House Republicans, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), showed their support, signing an amicus brief which stated in part: 

"This brief presents concern as members of Congress shared by untold millions of their constituents...that the unconstitutional irregularities involved in the 2020 presidential election cast doubt upon its outcome and the integrity of the American system of elections.

Next Battleground: Congress?

The Court needed to act fast because Monday is the date set for the slates of electors from all 50 states to cast their votes.   Barring some unforeseen development, Joe Biden will win that Electoral College vote, with well more than the 270 votes needed.

Another possible avenue of battling the election results could come when a combined session of Congress adds up the Electoral College votes on January 6^th, 2021 and then considers certifying those results.

For there to be any chance of a successful challenge there, members in both houses of Congress would have to protest those results.   Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks has already said he would object from the House side and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson has not ruled out objecting from the Senate side.

If there was to be a successful challenge in Congress, it would then be up to the House of Representatives to settle the election.    In such a case, each state delegation would get one vote.   At this moment, Republicans control 26 of those 50 state delegations.  That means if there were no defections, the House vote could well end up re-electing President Trump.

Hail Mary Passes Sometimes ‘Result in Touchdowns’

Conservatives have admitted their efforts to affect the actual national vote total are the equivalent of a Hail Mary pass.  

But as lawyer Alan Dershowitz said on Newsmax TV Friday evening, “Sometimes Hail Mary passes result in touchdowns.”

President Trump reacted to the Supreme Court decision Friday night with a tweet of few words, saying, "The Supreme Court really let us down. No Wisdom, No Courage!"

Top Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani insisted he will fight on.

Jenna Ellis, a high-ranking member of the Trump campaign’s legal team, outlined why they must fight on, tweeting, "It makes sense that a state would not have standing to challenge voting irregularities that only impacted state-wide elections. But when states join together in a process to elect the President and several states cheat, that violation of rules impacts the whole Electoral College."

Those disputing the election results have continued to insist there was so much fraud and so many irregularities across so many states, letting it stand would be a threat to democracy and future elections – that tens of millions of Americans could lose faith in the electoral system.

‘Significant & Unconstitutional Irregularities’

The Texas lawsuit contended the election had “suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities” in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin and this made it so that no one could really know “legitimately who won the 2020 election.”

It charged judges and/or bureaucrats had made changes to election law in those four states, and the U.S. Constitution says making such changes is the prerogative of only the states’ legislatures.

One other avenue of fighting these election results would be for those state legislatures to take back their power and reject what may well be a corrupted vote and instead pick their own slate of electors.   It would then be up to the U.S. Congress to pick which slate of electors from a state to approve: those named by the state legislature or those certified by the state’s governor.

Mat Staver of the legal defense group Liberty Counsel wrote on Thursday, “This Texas lawsuit is a result of ‘We The People’ demanding fair and transparent elections, which are the foundation of a free society."

He continued, "We must follow the law and protect the fundamental right of the people to elect their leaders. The Founders set the precedent in the Constitution, and it cannot be ignored.”

‘Seditious Abuse of the Judicial Process’

As for opponents of the Texas lawsuit, they’d labelled it everything from an attack on democracy to sedition.

In his official response to the lawsuit, Pennsylvania’s attorney general stated, “The Court 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.”

On SCOTUSblog.com, a popular website dedicated to covering the U.S. Supreme Court, Court observer Tom Goldstein editorialized Friday afternoon before the Court’s decision, “Don’t just deny Texas’ original action.  Decimate it.”

Threatens 'the Public's Basic Faith in Elections’

He continued, “President Donald Trump, other supportive Republicans, and aligned commentators have firmly convinced many tens of millions of people that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. If that view continues to take hold, it threatens not only our national politics for the next four years but the public’s basic faith in elections of all types that are the foundations of our society.”

 Kristen Clarke of the left-leaning Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law applauded the Court’s decision, saying in a statement, “Any other outcome would have signaled the death of core principles that lie at the heart of American democracy. This sends a strong signal that it's time for President Trump and his allies to shut down remaining cases clogging the courts.”

May be Time for a ‘Texit?’

As for reaction in the Lone Star state, Texas GOP Party chairman Allen West suggested maybe it’s time for secession.

He reacted to the Supreme Court’s rejection of the lawsuit by stating, “This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the U.S. Constitution and not be held accountable.  This decision will have far-reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic.  Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”

Indeed, Republican State Rep. Kyle Biedermann says he’s coming up with a “Texit” proposal to go on the ballot, because “The federal government is out of control and does not represent the values of Texans.”

Biedermann continued he wants Texans to have a chance to vote “for the State of Texas to reassert its status as an independent nation.”

Evangelist Mario Murillo Speaks Out

Evangelist Mario Murillo was one of the first evangelical leaders out with a reaction to the Supreme Court decision.  He’s among those who’ve been saying the prophets didn’t get it wrong and that this election is still not settled.

Murillo wrote Friday evening, “I still believe a miracle is coming.”  

He’s saying the justices could act differently as other pleas from those disputing this election come before them.   Or that another group, like Congress, could act.   He says what Christians face right now, “Is a deeper question.  This is a lesson in resolve.”

“There are two groups of believers that are totally going to lose it if the Court does not act,” Murillo continued.  “The first group are those who are in church, but are soft on abortion and the Bible.  They are only flirting with opposition to evil.  They will shrug their shoulders and continue slouching toward Gomorrah.

“The second group are those whose entire foundation rests on a prophetic word.  If that word fails, some will deflate into confusion and some will despair.

“Again, I am not saying Trump will lose.  I am not asking you to deny your faith that a miracle is coming.  I am asking something much more important.  Do you have total resolve?”

Then Murillo recounted how Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-Nego refused to bow down to King Nebuchadnezzar’s false god, even when faced with being thrown into the fiery furnace.

Murillo recounts how they said in the Book of Daniel, Chapter 3, “Our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king.”

Then, though, they showed their total resolve, saying, “But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the golden image which you have set up.”

They were saying no matter what happened, they would not bow down, worship and believe what the king demanded they believe.  Murillo is calling for that kind of resolve in the face of this present situation.

MORE BREAKING NEWS:

Meanwhile, the conservative-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear arguments this weekend on President Trump's lawsuit seeking to disqualify more than 221,000 ballots in a move that could shift the state toward Trump. 

STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FREE CBN NEWS APP 
Click Here Get the App with Special Alerts on Breaking News and Top Stories