Supreme Court Adds Texas Election Fraud Lawsuit Against GA, MI, PA, WI to the Docket And Rejects GOP Pennsylvania Lawsuit

40

Clearly the focus is now on the Texas case.

Texas Sues Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin at Supreme Court over Election Rules

The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court shortly before midnight on Monday challenging the election procedures in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on the grounds that they violate the Constitution.

Story continues below advertisement

https://twitter.com/richhiggins_dc/status/1336405957434351616?s=10

The Epoch Times:

Texas’ Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton on Tuesday filed an election lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alleging that the states used the pandemic to unlawfully change their election laws and urging the top court to have the election results declared unconstitutional.

Paxton argued in the filing (pdf) that the states used the outbreak of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus as an excuse make non-legislative changes to their election rules “through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity.”

He is requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court rules to prohibit the counting of the Electoral College votes cast by the four states and for those states that have already appointed electors, he asks the court to direct state legislatures to appoint new electors.

“While investigations into allegations of unlawful votes being counted and fraud continue, even the appearance of fraud in a close election would justify exercising the Court’s discretion to grant the motion,” Paxton argued, and called for the high court to extend the Dec. 14 deadline for certification of Electoral College electors “to allow these investigations to be completed.”

In seeking a determination by the court that the four battleground states conducted the 2020 election in violation of the Constitution, Paxton detailed actions taken by these states to modify election rules.

https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law/status/1336412172155416577?s=20

https://twitter.com/codemonkeyz/status/1336458764107431936?s=21

Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid to Undo Biden Victory in Pennsylvania
Dem predictions of Barrett-led coup fall flat

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a Republican appeal to undo the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in Pennsylvania.

By: Kevin Daley, Free Beacon, December 8, 2020 5:50 PM

The decision is a body blow to the long-shot effort to throw the election to the GOP-controlled Pennsylvania legislature, a move President Trump supports. The Court’s order did not give reasons for denying the appeal, which is standard practice for such decisions, and there was no noted dissent.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett apparently participated in the decision, despite Democratic calls for her recusal. Her supposed bias in election matters was a major feature of Democratic opposition to her confirmation.

Rep. Mike Kelly (R., Pa.) led a group of Pennsylvania lawmakers who asked the High Court to undo the certification of results in the Keystone State. He argued that the massive expansion of no-excuse mail-in voting violated the state constitution and that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court wrongfully tossed his legal challenge to that move.

“They make that request without any acknowledgment of the staggering upheaval, turmoil, and acrimony it would unleash,” attorneys for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania countered in legal filings. They added that a decision favoring Kelly would rank as one of the most “disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the Republic.”

Kelly’s appeal faced steep odds, since the Supreme Court usually lets state courts have the final word on state law. The order denying Kelly’s appeal came only hours after lawyers for the congressman filed their last legal brief.

Timing was a major factor in the dispute. Federal law requires Congress to recognize a state’s electors if they have been appointed as of Tuesday, as Pennsylvania’s have. As such, it wasn’t clear that legal challenges to Pennsylvania’s results were still viable. The Electoral College will cast its votes on Monday, Dec. 14, which could snuff out remaining challenges. Judicial orders interfering with the Electoral College would be unprecedented.

Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid to Undo Biden Victory in Pennsylvania

Dem predictions of Barrett-led coup fall flat

By: Kevin Dale, WFB, December 8, 2020:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a Republican appeal to undo the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in Pennsylvania.

The decision is a body blow to the long-shot effort to throw the election to the GOP-controlled Pennsylvania legislature, a move President Trump supports. The Court’s order did not give reasons for denying the appeal, which is standard practice for such decisions, and there was no noted dissent.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett apparently participated in the decision, despite Democratic calls for her recusal. Her supposed bias in election matters was a major feature of Democratic opposition to her confirmation.

Rep. Mike Kelly (R., Pa.) led a group of Pennsylvania lawmakers who asked the High Court to undo the certification of results in the Keystone State. He argued that the massive expansion of no-excuse mail-in voting violated the state constitution and that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court wrongfully tossed his legal challenge to that move.

“They make that request without any acknowledgment of the staggering upheaval, turmoil, and acrimony it would unleash,” attorneys for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania countered in legal filings. They added that a decision favoring Kelly would rank as one of the most “disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the Republic.”

Kelly’s appeal faced steep odds, since the Supreme Court usually lets state courts have the final word on state law. The order denying Kelly’s appeal came only hours after lawyers for the congressman filed their last legal brief.

Timing was a major factor in the dispute. Federal law requires Congress to recognize a state’s electors if they have been appointed as of Tuesday, as Pennsylvania’s have. As such, it wasn’t clear that legal challenges to Pennsylvania’s results were still viable. The Electoral College will cast its votes on Monday, Dec. 14, which could snuff out remaining challenges. Judicial orders interfering with the Electoral College would be unprecedented.

The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute here.

or

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding. Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on
Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.

If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
40 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
CharlieSeattle
CharlieSeattle
3 years ago

The S☭OTUS joined the Deep State.

Trump must declare Martial Law!

Black&White
Black&White
3 years ago
Reply to  CharlieSeattle

I think you don’t understand Alito’s decisions. He rejected PA case only because it’s a part of a bigger Texas case which includes all swing states cases including PA.

Chris Wolf
Chris Wolf
3 years ago

The Supreme Court of the United States says 75 million-plus Americans’ votes for president do not matter.
They will leave them CANCELLED by votes of illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, criminals, globalists and Leftists.
The New Date That Will Live In Infamy.

Teresita Geipin
Teresita Geipin
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wolf

The Supreme Court only denied the emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny it.
The suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court that’s why the Justices did not give an opinion. Seven States has joined the Texas Law Suit which goes straight to thne Supreme Court! This law suit outlines a lot of what the Trump campaign’s alleges.

Janet Swanborn
Janet Swanborn
3 years ago

Trump will not win any of these cases. As a Biden supporter, I hope they hear oral arguments and issue an opinion on at least one.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

You are wrong on that.
This is a U.S. Constitutional issue. The outcome is unknown.
Just curious, why did you support Biden? Skip the Trump hatred.
What Biden policies did you like?
Aren’t you concerned about his mental fragility and decline?

Janet Swanborn
Janet Swanborn
3 years ago
Reply to  felix1999

I always vote Democratic.

movingwaters
movingwaters
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

I can’t imagine being so morally depraved that I could proudly say I was a Biden supporter. You do know he not only committed treason with China but that his entire family is basically like small time mafia hoods. Or is that criminality the appeal?

I talk politics with anybody and everybody and know lots of Democrats. Every Democrat
I know voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020. It appears to be generally recognized among most people that the Democrats will ditch senile Biden and install the witch from hell Kamala Harris as POTUS despite here being ineligible for that position. One thing Democrats know about their party is that they are lawless. It makes you wonder where all those votes came from since Democrats generally think Biden doesn’t know on which planet he is living.

Cassandra
Cassandra
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

A woman proudly voting for a known rapist and child molester? How low can a demonrat go?? Don’t answer, that was a rhetorical question.

curmudgeon  VN Veteran
curmudgeon VN Veteran
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

Your lobotomy seems to be a roaring success. Daddy issues?

Patriotic American
Patriotic American
3 years ago

Many women that voted for Biden seemed to bear the classic manifestations of battered spouse syndrome, as well as being fickle a la Olive Oyl.

curmudgeon  VN Veteran
curmudgeon VN Veteran
3 years ago

I don’t believe most democRAT voters see past the vowel following the candidates name!

Janet Swanborn
Janet Swanborn
3 years ago

Well, it’s been almost a month and I’m right so far.

Patriotic American
Patriotic American
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wolf

You forgot a few others who cancel out the votes of patriots:
– Flag burners
– Statue topplers
– Monument destroyers

Blackmagikwolf Richardson
Blackmagikwolf Richardson
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wolf

ONCE outta the hands of the U.S.S.C:: IF they don’t ORDER A NEW ELECTION ENTIRELY or at least RULE IN TRUMP’S, TEXAS & AMERICA’S FAVOR::
THENNN THERE IS ONLY ONE MORE CHOICE LEFT TO FORCE THIS BS TO END IMMEDIATELY!!
1,2,5,10 MILLION ***WE THE PEOPLE*** GET OFF OUR DEAD BUTTS, ARRANGE A MEETING DAY, TIME TO GATHER IN FRONT OF CONGRESS!! >>**ARMED** for self protection only, a “PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY of the US WE THE PEOPLE MAJORITY; “”WHO DO OWN America: right””?!
MEET TO PRESERVE AMERICA!
NOT TO RIOT OR DO THE BS ANTIFAmily or the Bastards Love Murdering=BLM PRICKS ACTIONS DO TO DESTROY & CHANGE AMERICA FOR THE WORSE!
BUT TO SAVE IT, STAY THE SAME AS PAST 200+ YEARS!
1-2 MILL STRONG, Approx. another 12 A MILLION NATIONWIDE go to their LOCAL DEMONKRAUT: >”GOVERNORS, STATE REPS, STATE SENATORS OFFICES”!< ANOTHER few thousand go to the HOMES OF, & GET THESE IDIOTS: "GEORGE SORRYAZZ SORROS, THE OSLAMA'S, CLINTON'S, BIDEN'S, SUCKBERGS BEZOS, plus others into custody by the "DEFUNDED POPO'S"! FIRE ALL THE SOCIALIST TRASH! PHYSICALLY THROW THE DEMONKRAUT TRAITORS: THA PIGlosi, SCAMMER, SCHITT, SQUID SQUAD; Always Outtahermind Cortexdamaged=AOC, IMMA HO'.MAR, RATSCHITT FATLIPS FATIGUE, etc out of OUR=WE THE PEOPLE'S; BUILDINGS!! Right into the POPO'S WAITIN ARMS, TAKEN TO FED PEN TO AWAIT "HIGH TREASON" TRIALS!!! THE GUILTY ARE BROUGHT TO THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN GALLOWS TO BE HUNG OI N INTERNATIONAL TV!!! THAT WILL SEND A MESSAGE TO THE WORLD: **DO NOT MESS WITH AMERICA OR YA GET THIS! WE THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!**!!!

Nefarious420
Nefarious420
3 years ago

FB is totallty TRASH, all Geller Posts are fact checked as false no matter what. It is time for Pam to do what Candace Ownes has and sue their asses!!!!comment image

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago

Adopted – I don’t know what happened to your post.
It’s confusing but I think you are right about that!

Just guessing –
Justice Alito denied the PA. situation with no explanation but seems receptive to the Texas lawsuit with other states joining in. Maybe Texas has a stronger case? Other states could be disenfranchised from PA.’s actions and maybe the inequality clause kicks in? Other states have now signed onto it. Maybe combining them is one way to get to the issue sooner.

I believe Justice Alito understands our republic is at stake. Thomas and Alito are the most reliable Justices on the Court.

Supreme Court Denies to Block Pennsylvania
From Certifying Election Results

BY ZACHARY STIEBER
December 8, 2020

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an emergency request for injunctive relief filed by Pennsylvania lawmakers and candidates contesting the election results in the commonwealth.

The case centered around a piece of legislation that erased the requirement for people voting by mail to have a reason why they couldn’t vote in person. Plaintiffs argued it was implemented illegally and clashed with the state’s constitution despite not being passed by constitutional amendment.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/supreme-court-rejects-pennsylvania-gop-election-lawsuit_3610218.html

Chris Wolf
Chris Wolf
3 years ago

Maybe the unanimous, collective “Meh” issued by our Supreme Court Justices in Pennsylvania is an indication that they’ll all be on record and voting 5-4 or 6-3 for the plaintiffs in Texas.
We pray.

John C Durham
John C Durham
3 years ago

Court didn’t reject the Pennsylvania case, they declined to grant an injunction. It is favorable to that case, but needed someone smart enough to put all 6 cases together. Texas put together 4 states, enough (almost 70 electoral votes) for the Court to make a MEANINGFUL decision. (The court couldn’t take them one at a time. Trump attorneys should have put all State cases together. Hopefully, the suit can be expanded to include Nevada & Arizona.)

The Court will order the Legislatures of the States to make the decision. Either the States can accept a criminal election, throw everything out and face the wrath of their voters, or Republican majorities can show some spine and give it to Trump just like they know their Voters did to begin with.
That’s all Texas is asking for. The Chicken Sht Court can blame it on Texas. Maybe we need to move the Capital to Texas.

John C Durham
John C Durham
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Trump should have already replaced the CIA with Flynn; DOJ with Powell; FIB with Giuliani and fielded thousands of agent and lawyers to the 6 states. The Executive was missing in action. He is the Executive!!!
He can still do this, but I don’t think He understands that, under the Constitution HE IS ALL THESE AGENCIES. It is for HIM to MOVE the agencies-not to WAIT for them to MOVE.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Michael Flynn was just pardoned by President Trump and FINALLY the corrupt Judge Sullivan was FINALLY forced to DISMISS the bogus case against him a day or so ago. I think the guy needs a breather. Right now we need Rudy where he is and Powell just where she is. Trump knows better than anyone here what is going on and more. He is in a lame duck part of his Presidency. These people need to be confirmed and that will not happen nor should they be appointed right now – they are part of Trump’s LEGAL DEFENSE to fend off Biden!

DVader
DVader
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Insane even by Trump standards.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Trump was looking for someone to do just that and referenced it in an interview.
Thank God Texas stepped up! More states are joining Texas in their lawsuit.

The wild card is what will the GOP do if the U.S.S.C. goes our way? Will they still vote for Biden?
It’s hard to trust them… With fraud voting machines they don’t have to face the wrath of voters UNLESS they get rid of them. What’t their incentive to do that? The corruption that is going on is terrible. Maybe I have become too cynical….

Maybe the U.S.S.C. will come up with a different solution? Who knows! I suspect the roller coaster ride will continue for a bit as the black robes go through the motions of deciding what to do. Of late, I have been extremely unimpressed with their decisions. Fingers are crossed. I love pleasant surprises!

movingwaters
movingwaters
3 years ago
Reply to  felix1999

I have been extremely unimpressed with the Supreme Court decisions also. My North Carolina representative is the (R) Majority Whip. I will be contacting him today to inquire as to what our many conservative Republicans are doing to preserve the integrity of my vote.

I get so tired of encouraging conservative voters to do something and being told there is nothing you can do to make a difference and we just have to wait it out. The very small and very vile Left never acts so powerless.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  movingwaters

At least you have some Republican Representatives. We recently got a DEM as out local representative due to redistricting. The Republican we had was no better than a Democrat. NJ has always been corrupt but now it is in the open. So we stay in our “safe areas” and let the third world live in theirs.

I understand what you are saying about the left…. They are so evil.

I know you will appreciate this. Take care. In the very end, we win and that’s for eternity. We’ll never have to deal with them again.

Proverbs 4:16
For they do not sleep unless they have done evil; And their sleep is taken away unless they make someone fall.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Trump was looking for someone to do just that and referenced it in an interview.
Thank God Texas stepped up! More states are joining Texas in their lawsuit.

The wild card is what will the GOP do if the U.S.S.C. goes our way? Will they still vote for Biden?
It’s hard to trust them… With fraud voting machines they don’t have to face the wrath of voters UNLESS they get rid of them. What’t their incentive to so that? The corruption that is going on is terrible. Maybe I have become too cynical….

Maybe the U.S.S.C. will come up with a different solution? Who knows! I suspect the roller coaster ride will continue for a bit as the black robes go through the motions of deciding what to do. Of late, I have been extremely unimpressed with their decisions. Fingers are crossed. I love pleasant surprises!

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Trump was looking for someone to do just that and referenced it in an interview.
Thank God Texas stepped up! More states are joining Texas in their lawsuit.

The wild card is what will the GOP do if the U.S.S.C. goes our way? Will they still vote for Biden?
It’s hard to trust them… With fraud voting machines they don’t have to face the wrath of voters UNLESS they get rid of them. What’t their incentive to so that? The corruption that is going on is terrible. Maybe I have become too cynical….

Maybe the U.S.S.C. will come up with a different solution? Who knows! I suspect the roller coaster ride will continue for a bit as the black robes go through the motions of deciding what to do. Of late, I have been extremely unimpressed with their decisions. Fingers are crossed. I love pleasant surprises!

handesofawoman
handesofawoman
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

Thank you for the clarification and point taken. Remember, just as excellence is not a place, neither is corruption. Our country is awake and there is much work to do to clean house.

TJ Hessmon
TJ Hessmon
3 years ago
Reply to  John C Durham

What people do not understand it that there exists two elections systems in the United States.
One related to Federal elections and One related to State elections.
Where the state can set out its own rules (law) related to state elections, it cannot do the same related to Federal elections. This is where the Texas argument lies.

In the case of Georgia, it consolidated rule making authority over both types of elections in its Georgia Elections Board. In its response to the Texas complaint, Georgia argues there is a clear delineation between Rules and Law. They argue that the Georgia Board of Elections only has the power to change election rules and not election law. I find this to be a very week position as the very definition of law is that it is a rule related to action.

Georgia will need to prove conclusively that its statute so clearly defines the difference between Rule and Law that any such Georgia Elections Board rule changes would never result in a change to the outcome of Federal elections. This is a very difficult position for Georgia to argue in light of Article II of the constitution. It appears that the Georgia Elections Board which is not a body voted upon by the people, does not meet the intent of Article II.

Further, expect the supreme court to throw back to the Georgia legislature the role of defining what occurs with the 2020 Georgia electors, in light of the fact the Georgia Elections Board does not posses the authority to make Federal election rule changes. The Legislature will need to determine did such elections board rule changes provide for an election result that was inaccurate. Expect the State Farm Area video, witness testimony of election malfeasance, as well as threats by BLM and Antifa against the Legislators, to form the Legislators opinion.

The people of Georgia will need to show the legislature that they “have their back” and that neither BLM nor Antifa pose a threat to either them or their families.

Janet Swanborn
Janet Swanborn
3 years ago

Oh please take one of these cases, oh please, oh please, I do so want to read the “blistering opinion.”

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

Alito will take it but what they will do with it is unknown.
There is clearly a U.S. Constitutional issue being raised.
It is 5-4 conservative majority so brace yourself….for disappointment…..since you openly claim to be a Biden supporter….

Don Vito
Don Vito
3 years ago
Reply to  felix1999

I don’t janet is a human probably bot.

felix1999
felix1999
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

Alito will take it but what they will do with it is unknown.
There is clearly a U.S. Constitutional issue being raised.
It is 5-4 conservative majority so brace yourself….for disappointment…..since you openly claim to be a Biden supporter….

Cassandra
Cassandra
3 years ago
Reply to  Janet Swanborn

The rapist lover is getting excited …????????????

Steve
Steve
3 years ago

I’m smiling like a Cheshire cat 🙂 Don’t mess with Texas 🙂 still rings true.

curmudgeon  VN Veteran
curmudgeon VN Veteran
3 years ago
Reply to  Steve

comment image

DVader
DVader
3 years ago

Since the Supreme Court usually lets state courts have the final word on state law, what makes Texas et al think it will suddenly decide to do the opposite, especially after it just rejected the Kelly lawsuit in PA on precisely those grounds?
Obviously Trump and his gang are hoping for Santa Claus to pull this out of his bag.

Blackmagikwolf Richardson
Blackmagikwolf Richardson
3 years ago

I LOVEEEE BEING A TEXAN, LIVIN IN TEXAS & KNOWING SOOO MANY MORE JUST LIKE ME LIVE AROUND ME!
Many more who support & are PROUD AS A PEACOCK of PAXTON & THIS LAWSUIT!
TEXAS IS FORCING THE SUPREME COURT TO TAKE THIS CASE!
WITHOUT ANY OPTION TO DISMISS !T!!!
NOW WE GONNA GET SOME ACTION FOR TRUMP!!!
SCREW NEO-NAZI, BEIJING BIDEN’S SORRY AZZ
& HIS NICKLE BAG DOPE HO LOOKIN SIDEKICK:: “” KLAMIDIA “”!!!

Blackmagikwolf Richardson
Blackmagikwolf Richardson
3 years ago

PRETTTYYYY MUCH SAYS IT ALL BOUT TEXAS! Don’t ya thionk? lmaooooo
comment image

TJ Hessmon
TJ Hessmon
3 years ago

Where people are missing the point concerning the Texas case is that there are actually two types of elections. Federal elections and State elections. The constitution under article II sets out rules regarding Federal Elections only.

The problem with the case in Georgia is that the state combined both state and federal elections under a body which is not elected (Georgia Elections Board), therefore usurping the constitutional requirement under Article II, regarding Federal elections. Further, that the Georgia Elections Board did change election law. The Georgia response to the complaint does not argue this fact. Instead the Georgia response attempts to set out there exists a clear delineation between Rules and Law, and that the Georgia elections board can only change rules, not law.

Georgia can set forth its own authorization over state election statute, It cannot however set forth authorization over Federal election statute, as such is already defined under Article II of the constitution.

Georgia is going to find it very difficult to argue a clear delineation between rule and law exists in its statute and that the constitution is not violated by allowing the Georgia Elections Board changing “rules” concerning Federal elections. Georgia will have to prove such “rules” have no ability to change election outcomes.

This is where the supreme court decision will lie related to Georgia… Its a very difficult position for Georgia to argue.

My opinion is that Georgia will not be able to support its defense, because it over consolidated power over both state and federal elections, in its “Elections Board” and therefore violated the constitution related to Federal elections. Georgia will not be able to prove the delegation between law and rule exists related to the Elections Board. It further will not be able to prove that Elections Board, rule changes, did not effect the outcome of 2020 elections.

Sponsored
Geller Report
Thanks for sharing!