Israel's Mossad Account Posted Something Interesting About Iran's New Leader
Stelter Hung Out to Dry a Second Time This week – Says Network...
Progressive Crackpots Vs. Environmental Wackos
The Morality of Taxation
Healthcare Is Not a Right, Nor Should the Government Guarantee It
The Road to Tehran Runs Through Baku
The Parent-Led Rebellion Against EdTech
It’s Time to Build America With U.S.-Made Materials
DEI Is Dead. Corporate America Just Hasn’t Admitted It Yet.
Affordability Is Not a Slogan. Democrats Treat It Like One.
From Panic to Therapy: Cycle of Faux Climate Fear
President Donald J. Trump Can Index Capital Gains With Pen
The Unbearable Lightness of Being Gavin Newsom
The First Time in my Life That I Have Come into Conflict With...
Temple Israel Terrorist Died of Self-Inflicted Wound, Stuffed Truck With Accelerant and Fi...
Tipsheet

Sen. Cruz Urges Emergency Appeal on Pennsylvania Court Challenge

Sen. Cruz Urges Emergency Appeal on Pennsylvania Court Challenge
AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

An appeals court recently ruled that the Trump campaign cannot stop the certification of their election results. Joe Biden won the state by about 2 percent, according to the AP. But Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is urging the Supreme Court to hear an emergency appeal on a Pennsylvania election challenge, citing concerns about statewide mail-in voting enacted by the state legislature.

Advertisement

Cruz shared the statement on his Twitter page.

Cruz blamed the Democrat Pennsylvania Supreme Court for the change, and argued why it deserves to be analyzed.

"The appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the range in the middle of the game," he wrote. "If Pennsylvania wants to change how voting occurs, the state must follow the law to do so."

"In the current appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, dismissed the claim based on a legal doctrine called 'laches,' which essentially means the plaintiffs waited too long to bring the challenge," he continues. "But, the plaintiffs reasonably argue that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has not applied that doctrine consistently and so they cannot selectively enforce it now."

"Even more persuasively, the plaintiffs point out that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has also held that plaintiffs don't have standing to challenge an election law until after the election, meaning that the court effectively put them in a Catch-22: before the election, they lacked standing; after the election, they've delayed too long. The result of the court's gamesmanship is that a facially unconstitutional election law can never be judicially challenged"

Advertisement

Related:

JOE BIDEN TED CRUZ

You can read his full statement here.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement