If That Figure Is Correct, That Is a Massive Infiltration of Hezbollah by...
Australian Federal Police Commissioner Did Not Just Say That About the Bondi Terror...
Some of Us May Die, But It's a Sacrifice Democrats Are Willing to...
Hamas Operatives Funneled Over $8 Million to Military Wing in Italian Fundraising Scheme
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt Is Pregnant
Louisiana Conspiracy Used Chop Shop and Fake Company to Sell Stolen Tractors, Excavators,...
Over $200,000 in Cryptocurrency Forfeited in Multi-State Elder Fraud Case
Tweaking the Naughty List: Cops Seize 55 Pounds of Drugs Disguised as Christmas...
Jamaican National Sentenced to More Than 24 Years in Federal Meth Trafficking Case
Why is Ilhan Omar's Husband's Investment Firm Removing Names From Their Website?
Tennessee Bookkeeper Who Stole $4.6 Million From Clients Sentenced to Prison
Make Vehicles Affordable Again
FBI Saves Taxpayers Billions in HQ Relocation
Gunman Dead, 3 Injured After Opening Fire on Idaho Sheriff's Office
Indicted Democrat Gets Dragged For Post Hiding $100k Ring Bought With Dirty Money
Tipsheet

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