Thanks to commenters Cassander, Kirk, and Michael for the material below.
I'm including Texas in the total number of 18. Texas' complaint can be found here.
Missouri has filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Texas' complaint, and was joined by 16 other states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
The conclusion of the Texas complaint states, in part:
Although this Court’s original jurisdiction precedents would justify the Court's hearing this matter under the Court’s discretion, ..., Plaintiff State respectfully submits that the Court’s review is not discretionary. To the contrary, the plain text of § 1251(a) provides exclusive jurisdiction, not discretionary jurisdiction.
[(a)The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States. 28 USC 1251(a)]...
The issues presented here are neither fact-bound nor complex, and their vital importance urgently needs a resolution. Plaintiff State will move this Courtfor expedited consideration but also suggest that this case is a prime candidate for summary disposition because the material facts namely, that the COVID-19 pandemic prompted non-legislative actors to unlawfully modify Defendant States’ election laws,and carry out an election in violation of basic voter integrity statutes are not in serious dispute. ... This case presents a pure and straightforward question of law that requires neither finding additional facts nor briefing beyond the threshold issues presented here.
CONCLUSION
Leave to file the Bill of Complaint should be granted.
Here's the conclusion of the amicus brief:
The allegations in the Bill of Complaint raise important constitutional issues under the Electors Clause of Article II, § 1. They also raise serious concerns relating to election integrity and public confidence in elections. These are questions of great public importance that warrant this Court’s attention. The Court should grant the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint.
I find these arguments compelling. I can't conceive of any reason for the SCOTUS to refuse to hear the case. Especially when the case is supported by 18 states, led by Texas.
UPDATE: I hear we're up to 22 states now.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163234/20201209155327055_No.%2022O155%20Original%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf
ReplyDeleteTrump is now part of the case! Not sure what it means, but this is a BFD as someone would say
The more I think about it I wish he'd have stayed out of it. This makes it more political than it already is.
DeleteThe first sentence of the first substantive paragraph of the motion (after all the Table of Contents, etc. on page 8) deserves an award for understatement: "Our Country is deeply divided in ways that it arguably has not been seen since the election of 1860."
Deleteman, I'd love to get to 20...sounds more impressive. So, what's left? AK & ID should be a slam dunk, and toss in NH for good measure!
ReplyDeleteOhio too
Deleteheck, let's go for half: AK, IA, ID, NH, OH, WY and KY should do it!
DeleteWe’ve sent our request to the Ohio Attorney General
DeleteTransition Integrity Project war game ... based solely on Trump losing ...
ReplyDeletehttps://secureservercdn.net/192.169.223.13/lz3.b02.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Preventing_a_Disrupted_Presidential_Election_and_Transition_8-3-20.2.pdf
TIP - almost every sentence is propaganda and a lie.
DeletePure projection...
Really uncanny...
Frank
To the contrary, Frank. The TIP is pure wargaming. It is their gameplan and so far there's every indication they are sticking to it.
DeleteBy the way, word is that massive flights of military gear going into AFB Nellis in prep for setting up FOBs in California.
I printed this garbage - full of lies - they start off by predicting a similar outcome to the election of 1876 “a time of extreme partisanship and rampant disenfranchisement where multiple states proffered competing slates of electors and was resolved through a grand political bargain days before inauguration - one that traded an end to Reconstructiin for electoral peace snd resulted in Jim Crow laws”..............ah no idiots, Jim Crow laws started in 1865 after ratification of the 13th amendment
DeleteSo they begin with the race card starting on page 1 - almost every paragraph contains propaganda - I’m going to painfully read through it to see what strategies to expect from these goons.
I understand, Tschifty, I should have been clearer.
DeleteMy point was, wherever TIP says R's are doing this or will do that, they themselves (Dems) are already doing it, or will be doing it.
It's uncanny how they reversed everything so cleverly.
Classic projection.
Frank
Disappointed in my State of Ohio. Time to take a stand part of problem or part of solution.
ReplyDeleteCurious- could SCOTUS declare the elections in those states void and say they needed a do-over election?
ReplyDeleteNo.
DeleteWell...as we've seen with abortion, gay rights, and a plethora of other issues, the SC can do pretty much whatever it wants with little or no justification. The real question is whether the Fantastic 5 can agree on a remedy that actually does any good.
DeleteYeah, whether the Fantastic 5 can agree on a remedy that actually does any good, and craft their opinion in ways which manages to get at least one lefty Justice's vote, to reduce the chances of huge riots.
DeleteOf course Ohio hasn't joined. RINO DeWine is too busy telling people they can't dance.
ReplyDeleteThe little circus monkey is afraid he would make his democratic friends mad
DeleteNobody puts baby in a corner
DeleteHate to go off-topic, but…
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/huge-4-years-stonewalling-corrupt-fbi-finally-admits-holding-seth-richs-laptop/
Right. Odd timing.
DeleteTy Clevenger has fought those jerks tooth and nail over this.
DeleteMore than one of the agents involved in this case need to be hauled in front of the court and jailed by the judge.
Next stop... Seth Rich was the wikileaks source for the DNC emails.
Betcha fox news wished they wouldn't have settled with the Rich's.
If Seth Rich was the source for Wikileaks, it would make sense to see this development if the end result is a pardon for Assange.
DeleteWhat is the FBI? A separate branch of goverment? I heard on Tucker Carlson that the FBI also went up to that moron Swalwell and told him he was sleeping with a Chinese agent. Swalwell, a buffoon's buffoon, then informed the woman that the FBI was on to her, and she subsequently left the country. Truly, the FBI needs a makeover.
Delete@ titan28
DeleteI believe that is the bigger story to Swalwell than the Chinese spy.
The IC sat back and allowed a compromised individual to be elected into congress and become part of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Not only was he compromised by China but he was compromised by the IC it's self.
Think about what a great pet that would be to have as the IC. Your oversight is completely compromised to your own blackmail.
WOW at the Hover level BS that dredges up in this mess!!!!
Wow! Just when I had some glimmer of hope, Andy McCarthy just released a NR column that slams the Texas lawsuit. The kindest descriptor in his column was "fatuous". The lawsuit is a desperate political stunt with no hope of success and, according to McCarthy the All-Knowing, Ken Paxton knows it is futile. One part of the argument is that SCOTUS should have taken the Pennsylvania lawsuit, which he writes begrudgingly had some merit, so clearly they will NOT consider this lawsuit which lacks any legal merit. He might be right, but the level of vituperation is striking. I keep saying that none of this passes the "Other Foot" test. If a Democrat were the victim of this much election fraud and abuse... Well, you get the picture. Neil in SD
ReplyDeleteWhat a crock of horseshit he spews. SCOTUS has not dismissed the other case(s), they may very well be consolidated with this one.
DeleteMcCarthy was the guy who was all-in on the Russian Hoax as well until the tide began to change and his beloved DOJ and FBI were revealed to be less than honorable public 'servants.'
DeleteThe standard is not 'legal merit' but constitutional merit IMO, and these states are demanding adherence to the constitution.
Dershowitz, Turley, and now McCarthy. I really want to see them crushed and discredited.
DJL
Andy McCarthy, late to the party, lifted most of his good ideas from others, and throughout, he loathes Trump. Deep down he's a deep state tool. And exasperating to boot.
DeleteDittos, Titan 28. Thanks. I’ve said the same thing in the past. You did it effectively in fewer words!
DeleteI've gone to bat for McCarthy multiple times here, but -- well, to put things as diplomatically as I can, I was sadly mistaken to do so. I've seen zero signs post-election he's bothered in the least over the fraud that's occurred nor worried in the least for the fate of this nation and all its people.
DeleteHe'd disagree with these conclusions, of course, but it's plain to me the end of the American Experiment as we've known it is okey dokey with him, and that's about a hundred bridges too far for a red-blooded, Constitution-loving America-Firster like me.
I'll push back no more on any McCarthy bashing done here, and I'm sorry I did it in the past.
Has this ever happened before? 22 two states involved in a lawsuit.
ReplyDelete1861. The Union went after the confederacy.
DeleteRob S
Mark, no need to post this comment, but your last sentence reads "Especially when the case is supported by 18 cases, led by Texas." I'm sure you meant states.
ReplyDeleteTx.
DeleteI told you it was to switch to whiskey....
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'd prefer that the amicus states had filed suit separately - not sure how much weight an amicus filing carries.
The RINOs are crawling out of the woodwork: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163237/20201209155924009_2020-12-9%20Texas%20Scotus%20Amici%20Brief-%20FINAL.pdf
Really, I mean honestly, what do they expect citizens to do when the rule of law is no longer upheld? I mean, I'm struggling a bit to understand exactly whom Jack and Mark and the Google guy and Adam Schiff and Xiden and John Roberts and Nancy and Andy McCarthy are going to get to enforce their edicts? They just counting on us all going corporate and the HR departments will rule us? Can they not see in this suit that we are already beginning to sort ourselves out? I'm happy to join the side that says -- This fraud will not stand!
ReplyDeleteNot a bad line you got there, Mark: the Great Sorting.
Delete@ Mark A,
DeleteI believe that they are completely convinced that jobs, mortgages, car payments and family will be enough to keep conservatives at bay. (Their probably right)
We are about the best armed, most polite and well mannered opposition you could possibly ask for in times like this.
Personal sacrifice for the greater good is often times completely over ruled by personal selfishness, comfort and temporary safety of not responding.
Few will be willing to step outside of that comfy little bubble... It's sad.
RINOs gleefully accept to be cannon fodder. Disgusting.
ReplyDeleteArizona files its own brief in support of Texas (but separate from Missouri's).
ReplyDeleteI know the answer, but I have to ask. Has just one 'reporter' awakened Biden and asked him about the Texas lawsuit that has been joined by nearly half of the states in the union? Just asking...
ReplyDeleteDJL
May the brilliance of NOT being a pure Democracy shine through. The more I read what they have done, the more I see that thr framers of the Constitution were true intellectual giants.
ReplyDeleteDave
At such an historic juncture in U.S. history , surely the conservative justices realize that they have a great opportunity to set present and future elections straight by following the U.S. Constitution . Our forefathers would expect nothing less than for them to take a courageous stand . They also by not standing up to the leftist attempt to steal the 2020 presidential election risk getting the court diluted in the future by Biden et al . The Republican party will also be regarded as a weak one due to Rhinos hurting party solidarity . Democrats are dirty fighters but have learned to stick together when up against Republicans. Unfortunately , their counterparts have never learned that tactic !
ReplyDeleteWell said. We would also expect that the Electoral College take a courageous stand. Otherwise, they face extinction under the DemocRats.
DeletePrayers folks. America needs prayers. I PRAY that this works. But one way or the other, there are storms ahead.
ReplyDeleteHard to believe Tennessee hasn't signed on yet. The governor, Bill Lee, seems to be a moderate, but he's better than the retiring senator Alexander replaced by Bill Hagerty.
ReplyDeleteDJL
Tennessee has signed on... around 2:30 pm 12/9 yesterday
DeleteTN is in.
ReplyDeleteI've seen rumors about AK, but find no confirmation.
DeleteAt the disinformation center, the NYT's has an article titled "17 Republican Attorneys General back Trump in farfetched election lawsuit." Written by two of their liberal reliables that were all in on the Russian Hoax, Jeremy Peters and Maggie Haberman. Of course they offer no substance as to why this lawsuit is farfetched; just pablum for their brain dead readers to drool over. Whatever their salaries are, a dollar per annum would be overpaid. Perhaps they consulted with Andy McCarthy, but if they did he isn't credited...
ReplyDeleteDJL
It appears to me that McCarthy frames the Texas complaint wrongly. He says it's a matter of state officials simply not enforcing their laws. But the complaint actually alleges that the laws themselves were affirmatively changed--whether by courts or by state officials. In either case actual new policies were promulgated and widely publicized (often with the help of third party money from Zuckerberg)--affirmative changes were made by parties who were not entitled to make those changes and who usurped the rightful authority of the state legislators that is mandated in the US Constitution. Frivolous? McCarthy's argument is what's frivolous, and if the SCOTUS buys that twaddle they'll be seen to be frivolous as well.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe that McC actually read the suit, or did he just parrot someone else?
DeleteWhat's the phrase? You can't see the forest for the trees. That is McCarthy to a 'T.' He is locked on and tracking - the wrong target. Texas and the supporting states are alleging improper actions within the accused states that allowed for illegal votes to be cast against state law, and in some cases endorsed not only by the state's supreme court but also by Roberts' SCOTUS by failing to stop this unlawful activity. It isn't that difficult to understand - unless you're a pointy headed lawyer I suppose...
DeleteDJL
Well he still writes for NR, which seems to be in a race with the WSJ opinion editors to see who gets the first offer from th Lincoln Project!
DeleteDo the claims which have been made by the State of Texas (and the 17 or so additional states which have joined in) against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin have any merit whatsoever?
ReplyDeleteNot if you ask the defendants, who simply reject the claims out of hand and insult the proponents.
From Wikipedia:
• The office of Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr said that Paxton was "constitutionally, legally and factually wrong about Georgia."
• Georgia's deputy secretary of state, Jordan Fuchs, denounced the suit as "false and irresponsible."
• Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel called the suit a "publicity stunt... beneath the dignity" of the Texas AG office. She added, "The erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn't attributable to the good people of Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia or Pennsylvania but rather to partisan officials, like Mr. Paxton, who place loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country."
• Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the case "genuinely embarrassing."
• Pennsylvania AG Josh Shapiro stated, "These continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless -- they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican party to disregard the will of the people-- and name their own victors."
Why does anyone expect anything from today's Lefty brass, other than ad hominem and straw man?
DeleteIt must be so hard for Andy McCarthy, trying always to discern which way the wind is blowing and making sure some fraction of the Elite is listening to him...because when he loses them he'll have absolutely no one left who cares what he says.
ReplyDeleteWhere is Idaho......Has my beloved state decided to punt on this or as I fear just complacent...either way it’s not a good look for such a conservative state
ReplyDeleteNot happy in CoeurdAlene d’Alene
From southern Idaho, tried to call the
DeleteIdaho Attorney General and tell him to join the
Texas lawsuit. The voice mail was full, so I emailed him. No response. BS
I can't imagine what the remedy would be. Who even thinks Nimrod Republican legislators, remember the idiots in PA are the ones responsible for the PA mail-in voting catastrophe in the first place, will be able to right anything?
ReplyDeleteAgain, I realize this Texas case is built around a "macro" Constitutional issue, a serious one, I believe, so there will be no need to supply evidence as to the particulars (I'm no lawyer, so maybe I'm wrong).
Even so. That's the part I keep coming back to. Judge Bibas, in PA, a Trump appointee, in rejecting Trump's claims, said "charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
He also said the votes in question were only 80,000, not enough to change the outcome. So, which is it? How many votes do we think Dems stole from DJT in PA? And how would we know? How was it done?
Where are the truckloads of ballots? Where is the Dominion machine that turned 10,000 Biden votes into 250,000? Absent that, we really do have nothing.
Once we know, that we saw an unprecedented maneuver, of a simultaneous halt of vote-counting in at least 3 (all of them swing) states, the burden of proof is on the Dems, to show that they didn't use those "missing" hours to stuff ballot boxes.
DeleteGuys like Bibas can try to frame this as akin to a criminal trial, of "innocent 'til proven guilty".
Tens of millions across the US see this as akin, to whether or not to remain a member of a club.
If our foes get to stuff ballot boxes at will, we'll not try to "prove" that it happens, we'll just quit the club.
See buzz about a map, of the states helping w/ the TX case, in the vid at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=240882 .
Right on. The sorting out has begun.
DeleteJust skimmed through PA's response to TX -- bit.ly/37QhlEw
ReplyDeleteWeak as well water. Not only does it continually fail to address TX's specific cites to both PA and federal law as well as to the Constitution, what arguments it does offer are mostly a combination of appeals to authority (of hack lower courts that have supported PA's positions), insults and hand-waving.
It's basically one bit of feigned indignance after another, front to back.
I'm having a hard time seeing how this thing will sway any honest Justice - the only question is how many of those are there?
O/T and barely related, but it seems to me a re-introduction of civics in our middle school and high schools would be a great thing...but I also think at least a semester (minimum mandatory sentencing) ;0)...in logic with emphasis on logical fallacies would be gold.
Delete"with emphasis on logical fallacies..."
DeleteAmen.
And countless real-life examples of how they're used and why no one who uses them should ever receive a single vote for political office.
No doubt. Like Mark Twain wrote about politicians. "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it."
DeleteI grew up on well water - thank you very much. When you actually read -as opposed to skim - the motion, let me know if you have any other thoughts. You are obviously an intelligent man.
Deletehttps://trendingpolitics.com/leading-chinese-professor-talks-about-how-u-s-really-works-and-why-ditching-trump-was-the-goal/
ReplyDeleteUmmm, did folks see the news that the FBI served a subpoena in investigating Ken Paxton this week, only *after* he filed his SCOTUS case?? https://www.courthousenews.com/fbi-subpoenas-texas-ag-ken-paxton-after-alleged-bribery-reports/
ReplyDeleteIt seems this investigation has been ongoing for a while, so why wait until after to do this?