This is about those 4 states changing their election rules at the last minute. That ended up diluting the votes of the other states. So, the majority of states votes ended up being worthless. Election officials and even the state supreme courts packed with liberal judges, changed election rules at the last minute including, election safeguards already in place. They have no authority under the constitution to do so. Only the legislature can change election laws. Considering the numerous parties involved in the lawsuit, I expect the US Supreme Court to weigh in decide on the constitutional issues raised.
‘Seditious abuse of the judicial process’: States reject Texas effort to overturn Biden’s election The legal briefs from Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin largely directed their fury at Texas’ attorney general. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/...ct-texas-effort-election-joe-biden-win-444414 Officials from four presidential swing states forcefully criticized an effort by Texas and President Donald Trump to enlist the Supreme Court to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election, with Pennsylvania calling the last-ditch legal effort “seditious” and built on an “absurd” foundation. “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 said in a 43-page brief signed by Attorney General Josh Shapiro and his deputies. “In support of such a request, Texas brings to the Court only discredited allegations and conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact,” the attorneys wrote. “Accepting Texas’s view would do violence to the Constitution and the Framers’ vision.” The briefs from Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin — states targeted in Texas’ lawsuit, brought by Attorney General Ken Paxton, which Trump is attempting to join — directed their fury largely at Paxton. And they pleaded with the justices to reject the suit out of hand, warning that anything else would give states unprecedented power to sue each other to enforce their will, leading to waves of partisan retribution that shake the foundations of federalism. “I mean, I can't imagine how he has the standing to do that anyway,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, said in an interview on Wednesday. “Nobody in Michigan elected AG Paxton to intervene in our electoral systems or processes here. And it's just really bewildering to me, and exhausting.” Michigan’s filing notes that several courts, both state and federal, had rejected similar claims to those Paxton had made: “The base of Texas’s claims rests on an assertion that Michigan has violated its own election laws. Not true. That claim has been rejected in the federal and state courts in Michigan, and just yesterday the Michigan Supreme Court rejected a last-ditch effort to request an audit.” Texas’ lawsuit makes a statistical argument against Biden’s victory, noting that he trailed in the early count of votes, but omitting the fact that many key states were legally prohibited from beginning to count mail-in ballots — which tilted heavily in favor of Democrats, thanks in part to a months-long effort by Trump to discredit them — until Election Day. It's a fact that was well known ahead of the election, in which election administrators of both parties pleaded with the public and the media to have patience and not draw conclusions from early returns. “Texas first alleges that ‘[t]he probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the four Defendant States independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion,’” the brief from Pennsylvania read, citing Texas’ so-called expert who assumed that those counted before and after early in the morning were the same pool of voters. “But the votes counted later were indisputably not ‘randomly drawn’ from the same population of votes, as those counted earlier were predominantly in-person votes while those counted later were predominantly mail-in votes,” the Pennsylvania filing continued, noting that Texas’ own filing highlighted the fact that Democratic voters were more likely to vote by mail. Georgia, the only one of the four targeted states run by Republicans, issued a similarly weighty rejection of Paxton’s suit. “The novel and far-reaching claims that Texas asserts, and the breathtaking remedies it seeks, are impossible to ground in legal principles and unmanageable,” the Georgia filing read. “This Court has never allowed one state to co-opt the legislative authority of another state, and there are no limiting or manageable principles to cabin that kind of overreach.” Texas’ lawsuit drew skepticism even among Republicans on Capitol Hill, who have broadly been supportive of the president’s efforts to undermine faith in the democratic system. Some Texas GOP lawmakers, including Sen. John Cornyn, raised questions about the merits. Rep. Chip Roy called it “a dangerous violation of federalism,” and House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy twice dodged questions about whether he backed the legal effort. However, a group of 106 House Republicans signed a friend of the court briefing, arguing the defendant states acted illegally and that their electors should be prevented from voting.
And multiple times in the last 5 elections... myself, my wife and many of the people I talk to about this... forced to sign provisional ballots... The explanation has been we not "registered" which is bullshit... so we may conclude something odd has happened... like someone already voted for us. This provisional ballot crap comes up anytime I talk to any republican in my area about voting. This is one of the reasons why so many of us know that in California now our voting is ripe with fraud. All we ask is that you have to show ID to vote. Simple as that.
Laugh all you want, but SCOTUS will hear this case, if nothing more than to put an end to all of it. Texas and the other States have a valid point, not that each State can govern itself as it sees fit, but is there a limit when a States laws effect other States. We see cases argued in this context but never before in election law. Can one or a small number of States election laws be so lax that that the unthinkable could disrupt the legal process of the majority? It doesn’t really matter if it did, does there exist the possibility that it could happen? I think we may see the beginnings of minimal level of voter identification and safeguards put in place in a national level.
A convenient way of cheating. They mail out ballots which they steal, cast a vote in your name. Then, you apply for a provisional ballot which is never counted because then, the records state you already voted by mail. So, the real voter gets disenfranchised, not able to cast his vote while, the cheaters get to cast multiple ballots. In this November 3, 2020 elections, numerous people say, they came to polling place to vote only to be told, they already voted? There are multiple incidents of mass election fraud by the very same election officials tasked to keep our elections free and fair as it should be. The problem is the cheaters are never charged and prosecuted by extreme liberals in high places.
Morons more concerned with spelling than with free and fair elections. You would think Americans would welcome review by the Supreme Court when many states have requested it. Now would I expect that from DNC moron foreign trolls... like the myriad of trolls on this site. Nope... But.. Americans... why would you not want to make sure our vote was secure?