What I took away from reading the texas lawsuit is that what you had happen was states were making changes to their election practices due to covid without actually changing the laws. Think how divisive things like voter ID laws are and it's not hard to imagine no election rule changes are going to get passed in a hurry.
Specific examples are pennsylvania allowing absentee ballot 3 days after the election even though by law any ballots arriving by mail after election day are void.
Poll watchers who monitor votes being counted were not given meaningful access to monitor even though by law they must be given access.
Due to the huge number of absentee ballots election counters did not verify ballot signatures as required.
The reason all these lawsuits failed is because there is no real injunctive relief you can seek. And no court is going to nullify an election.
None of these things are evidence of voter fraud but the fact that election officials were allowed to deviate from the legal requirements dictated by law is something I find controversial and is something we should be allowed to talk about.
That is incorrect. PA Supreme Court ruled that there is no specific law against that ...Pennsylvania Republicans had sought to block the counting of late-arriving ballots, which the state's Supreme Court had approved last month..... [1]
B) >>>poll watchers who monitor votes being counted were not given meaningful access to monitor even though by law they must be given access.<<<
That is also incorrect. The dispute was about how far away they should be. Both Democratic and Republican observers were at the same distance which was at least 6 feet because of COVID. One of the Judges allowed for the distance to be narrowed for everybody
C) >>>Due to the huge number of absentee ballots election counters did not verify ballot signatures as required.<<<
That is also incorrect. Where state law mandated it, this was done.
D) >>>The reason all these lawsuits failed is because there is no real injunctive relief you can seek. <<<<
This is incorrect. The lawsuits failed because
a) the lawyers actually stated in court that they were not alleging fraud but were 'concerned'
b) the lawyers said in court that there were some irregularities but not enough to change the outcome
1. https://www.npr.org/2020/10/19/922411176/supreme-court-rules...
I get the appeal of getting sucked into partisanship. Your comment reads like someone who has a conclusion and is searching for evidence.
Specifically to your claim about Pennsylvania mail in ballots see below.
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/li/uconsCheck.cfm...
Act 77 of Pennsylvania law:
"a completed mail-in ballot must be received in the office of the county board of elections no later than eight o'clock P.M. on the day of the primary or election."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/3824210...
You would have thought the lawyers who prepped them would have stopped them from wasting the courts' time.
What county has a score for Biden at "781%"? I'd love to read more about that. Was there a lawsuit filed where I can read about this claim in some official form?