Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit last Monday with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the election procedures conducted in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Paxton noted in the lawsuit that the election ‘suffered from significant and constitutional irregularities in the defendant states.” He based the lawsuit on the grounds that these states violated the Constitution.

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were “voting irregularities” in these states as a result of the above.

Sources familiar with the lawsuit told Sara A. Carter that citizens in states which voted for President Donald Trump can pressure their Attorney Generals to support the lawsuit by submitting an Amicus brief.

FROM THE LAWSUIT:

As set forth in the accompanying brief and complaint, the 2020 election suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities in the Defendant States:

Non-legislative actors’ purported amendments to States’ duly enacted election laws, in violation of the Electors Clause’s vesting State legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors.

• Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters, with more favorable allotted to voters – whether lawful or unlawful – in areas administered by local government under Democrat control and with populations with higher ratios of Democrat voters than other areas of Defendant States.
• The appearance of voting irregularities in the Defendant States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States’ election laws.All these flaws – even the violations of state election law – violate one or more of the federal requirements for elections (i.e., equal protection, due process, and the Electors Clause) and thus arise under federal law. See Bush v Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 113 (2000) (“significant departure from the legislative scheme for appointing Presidential electors presents a federal constitutional question”) (Rehnquist, C.J., concurring). Plaintiff State respectfully submits that the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging-chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law. Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future elections.

TX v State Motion 2020-12-07 FINAL by Sara on Scribd

You can follow Sara A Carter on Parler @SaraCarterOfficial or on Twitter @SaraCarterDC