What's the harm to Texas?

from The Gray Area:
12/8/20; Updated 12/9/20:

What's the harm to Texas if other states break election law? That's what is being asked in reaction to Texas AG Ken Paxton bringing suit in the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia for violations of those state's election law.

There are several important points.

1. When states sue other states, the suit can go directly to the Supreme Court as the court of original jurisdiction, that means it’s like a trial court. It does not have to make its way through the appeals process of lower courts.

2. Texas is harmed by the violations of others states election law because if these four states are allowed to get away with basically undermining the United States Constitution, then all existing election law is moot. It’s out the window. It is a precedent for similar activity by others states like Texas. And this violation occurred regardless of the amount of election fraud that may have resulted. If they are able to render state legislators irrelevant in writing election law, then they are being affected in Texas by violation of law, and they don’t want that to happen. They’re trying to make sure that election law is kept sacrosanct and that the Constitution is not violated. It’s a big case.

3. The four offending states each violated the U.S. Constitution in two ways. First, they violated the Electors Clause of Article II of the Constitution when executive or judicial officials in the states changed the rules of the election without going through the state legislatures. The Electors Clause requires that each State ‘shall appoint’ its presidential electors ‘in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.'”

4. The second constitutional violation occurred when individual counties in each of the four states changed the way that they would receive, evaluate, or treat the ballots. Twenty years ago, in the landmark case of Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court held that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when one Florida county treated ballots one way, and another Florida county treated ballots a different way. Voters had the constitutional right to have their ballots treated equally from county to county.”

5. “The lawsuit asks the Supreme Court to remand the appointment of electors in the four states back to the state legislatures.” They’re the ones who have the power to name them anyway. “As the Supreme Court said in 1892 in the case of McPherson v. Blacker, ‘Whatever provisions may be made by statute, or by the state constitution, to choose electors by the people, there is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time.'”

Ken Paxton went on Fox & Friends to explain the suit.

More From The Rush Limbaugh Show (subscription required):

More From FoxNews:

365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )