Well, prucomaclu, aren't you ashamed of yourself for being so gullible, delusional, and Anti-American to think Texas's fraudulent lawsuit actually had a chance? Shame on you, and shame on Texas.
Texas: Don't mess with America!
https://www.mediaite.com/news/breaking-supreme-court-rejects...
>BREAKING: Supreme Court Rejects Texas Election Lawsuit
>The Supreme Court has smacked down the much-talked-about Texas lawsuit to overturn the results of the election.
>Days after rejecting a Pennsylvania case, the order from the Supreme Court reads Texas’ motion “is denied for lack of standing” and says “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections.” [...]
>Furthermore, the complaint was riddled with falsehoods and unproven conspiracy theories of voter fraud that centered around a bogus statistical analysis that claimed there was only a “1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000” chance of Biden winning the four states. [...]
>“Texas’s effort to get this Court to pick the next President has no basis in law or fact. The Court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated,” Pennsylvania’s brief stated.
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1337540950348996608
Brad Heath @bradheath
Here's the Supreme Court order rejecting Texas' attempt to throw out the results of the presidential election in four other states. The court declines to hear it; the only dispute is a technical one over the manner by which it is killed.
It's over.
The court's decision - that Texas lacks standing to bring this case - means it could not and did not reach the other issues. But these claims have all been rejected for many, many, many other reasons by other state and federal courts. Many.
Justices Alito and Thomas indicated that the court was (in their very consistent view) required to hear the case but that they too "would not grant other relief" - meaning they too wouldn't sign on to Texas' request for an injunction throwing out the election.
After all that, not one of the three Supreme Court justices nominated by President Trump made even a squeak in public to support this breathtaking attempt to invalidate the election he lost.
Again - this is over.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p86...
(ORDER LIST: 592 U.S.)
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2020
ORDER IN PENDING CASE
155, ORIG. TEXAS V. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL.
The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.
Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.
CERTIORARI GRANTED
20-222 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, ET AL. V. AR TEACHER RETIREMENT, ET AL.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/5-glaring-pro...
>5 big problems with Texas' bid to overturn Biden's win at the Supreme Court
>"This case is hopeless," said SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein, who argues frequently before the court.
Read it yourself, because I'm not summarizing it for you, since you're not arguing in good faith, just trying to waste people's time.
After you read that, can we both agree on the fact that Trump is a pathetic sore loser, who has absolutely no chance of overturning the election, which Joe Biden won fair and square, and by Trump's own definition and words, won it in a "massive landslide" (except that Biden ALSO won the popular vote, which Trump LOST both times)?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/11/06/biden...
>Biden On Track For What Trump Once Called ‘Massive Landslide’ Electoral College Victory
>Democratic candidate Joe Biden is on track to win the presidency, but if he wins in all the states where he’s currently ahead, the victory won’t even be close by some peoples’ standards: namely, President Donald Trump’s standards.
>Biden leads Trump in Georgia, Pennsylvania and Nevada, which, along with Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona and the rest of the states that have been called for him, would give him exactly 306 electoral votes.
>If that number seems familiar, it’s because Trump won that same number of electoral votes in 2016 after capturing Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan himself, even as he lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes.
>In an interview with Fox News host Chris Wallace in Dec. 2016, Trump dismissed a question about Russian interference in the election by boasting “we had a massive landslide victory, as you know, in the electoral college, I guess the final number is 306 and [Clinton] is down to a very low number.”
>Two of Trump’s electors ended up defecting in 2016, along with five of Clinton’s, giving him 304 to her 227, which he tweeted was a “MASSIVE (304-227) Electoral College landslide victory!”
>Biden is also on track to win the popular vote by an even larger margin than Clinton did: he currently leads by over 4 million votes, nearly 3 points, according to the New York Times.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio...
>Battleground states file fiery condemnations of election results lawsuit as 106 House GOP back Texas
>Officials in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia have filed ferocious condemnations of the Texas lawsuit in the Supreme Court that seeks to overturn election results in the four key battleground states won by Joe Biden.
>The Pennsylvania filing describes the move by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and supported by Donald Trump, as using a “cacophony of bogus claims” in support of a “seditious abuse of the judicial process”, resting on “a surreal alternate reality”.
>State Attorney General Josh Shapiro wrote: “Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states for yielding results with which it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas's preferred candidate for president is legally indefensible and is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy."
>Mr Trump lost the four key states, and the action by Texas is an attempt to invalidate millions of votes, thereby potentially swinging the election to him. The states’ court filings come as 106 Republican lawmakers signed onto the Texas brief in support fo delaying their certification of presidential electors.
>The Pennsylvania filing continues: “Texas's effort to get this court to pick the next president has no basis in law or fact. The court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated.”
>In her state’s filing, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel described the challenge as “unprecedented” and “without factual foundation or a valid legal basis". She wrote: “The election in Michigan is over. Texas comes as a stranger to this matter and should not be heard here.”
>Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the lawsuit an "extraordinary intrusion into Wisconsin's and the other defendant states' elections, a task that the Constitution leaves to each state."
>Attorney general of Georgia Chris Carr concurred and argued that the case does not meet the standard for the court to hear it: “Texas presses a generalised grievance that does not involve the sort of direct state-against-state controversy required for original jurisdiction.”
>He continued: "And in any case, there is another forum in which parties who (unlike Texas) have standing can challenge Georgia's compliance with its own election laws: Georgia's own courts."