Utilizing a little known or used provision in Article III of the United States Constitution, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed suit against the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and Wisconsin in the U.S. Supreme Court for installing election rules and law unconstitutionally.
The overriding law – the Constitution – says that election law must be passed by state legislatures, and in 2020, the year of COVID, the Wuhan Flu, in those states, rules were changed and laws amended using the pandemic as an excuse for why the legislature could not meet to do their jobs.
The Texas suit is clear, and it presents a compelling case. 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.”…
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.
So when election officials in Wayne County, Michigan, ignored the requirements of Michigan law and denied poll watchers access to vote counting, while other counties in Michigan followed the law, that violated the Equal Protection Clause. Similarly, in Wisconsin, when the Administrator of the City of Milwaukee Elections Commission ignored the requirements of Wisconsin law and directed election workers to write in the addresses of witnesses on the envelopes containing mail-in ballots, while ballots without witness addresses were deemed invalid elsewhere, that resulted in the unequal treatment of ballots in the state.
The Supreme Court can decide not to accept the case, but in a matter, this consequential – a presidential election – rejection might not be taken well by the people. As it is, this suit, among others, is being called “frivolous” and unnecessary as the vast majority of the mainstream media and those in the Biden camp as well as never Trumpers are simply going along with the idea that former Vice President Joe Biden is the victor in this race despite the Electoral process not having played out as yet.