Let it never be said that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is all hat and no cattle. He and his assistants have crafted a brilliant complaint against the states of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania challenging their administration of the 2020 presidential election.
In their filing, Texas doesn’t claim fraud in the named states, only that the 2020 election suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities. Including:
• 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 selection of Presidential Electors. In other words, Secretaries of State and other election officials changed election laws without the expressed legislative approval of their respective legislature.
• Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters. Within each of these states, voters in some parts of those states were treated differently than voters in other parts of that state. In heavily Democrat portions of the state, voters confronted far more relaxed standards to exercise their franchise than in Republican areas.
• The appearance of voting irregularities in these States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States’ election laws.
In summary, Texas is claiming that these flaws – including violations of state election laws – violate one or more of the federal requirements for elections (i.e., equal protection, due process, and the Electors Clause). They cite 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). AG Paxton respectfully argues that the electoral irregularities in the 2020 elections exceed the hanging-chad saga of the 2000 election in their departure from both state and federal law. The result of these illegal and unconstitutional actions by the named States preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and thereby threaten to taint this and all future elections.
Recommended
Texas clarifies both the wrong committed and the requested remedy. “Taken together, these flaws affect an outcome-determinative numbers of popular votes in a group of States that cast outcome-determinative numbers of electoral votes. This Court should grant leave to file the complaint and, ultimately, enjoin the use of unlawful election results without review and ratification by the Defendant States’ legislatures and remand to the Defendant States’ respective legislatures to appoint Presidential Electors in a manner consistent with the Electors Clause and pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2.”
In the end, it is state legislators who retain the exclusive right to review and ratify elections. They have the final say on their state’s appointment of Presidential Electors. The Supreme Court is asked to set aside these illegal vote totals and remand the question to the respective legislatures for their review, giving them the opportunity to appoint new electors.
Pure Genius.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz has offered to argue the case before the Supreme Court. Can you imagine anyone better? As an elementary student he memorized the Constitution. He is now one of the most persuasive and accomplished debaters in the nation.
For Justice Roberts this is a hot potato.
Texas is not just any state. The former Republic of Texas retains rights it was granted when given statehood. For example, should Democrats attempt to expand the Senate with DC and Puerto Rico statehood, Texas could divide itself into five states.
Texas has a GDP larger than Russia. They are one of the world’s largest energy producers. Texas is a growing technology powerhouse. Wealth and entrepreneurial talent are gravitating toward Texas. Witness Elon Musk moving from California.
Many Texans believe they also retain the right to secede. If the Supreme Court ignores election laws plainly written and the clear Constitutional questions contained in the filing, the arguments for secession may escalate.
If we no longer are a nation of laws, especially election laws, if Constitutional guarantees like equal protection are ignored and if we are to have a President who will ignore borders anyway, why should Texans pretend they are part of a functioning republic? Why not simply claim that it’s “become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another?”
Remember, Texas already has its own gold bullion repository.
Maybe that’s why they say…don’t mess with Texas.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member