Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Quote:

---

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.

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. The lawsuit says:

Certain officials in the Defendant States presented the pandemic as the justification for ignoring state laws regarding absentee and mail-in voting. The Defendant States flooded their citizenry with tens of millions of ballot applications and ballots in derogation of statutory controls as to how they are lawfully received, evaluated, and counted. Whether well intentioned or not, these unconstitutional acts had the same uniform effectthey made the 2020 election less secure in the Defendant States. Those changes are inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.



This case presents a question of law: Did the Defendant States violate the Electors Clause by taking non-legislative actions to change the election rules that would govern the appointment of presidential electors? These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States' election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution. By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens' vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution.

Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states.

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

vette said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

That Joe Biden would be president? Is this a real question?

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

Quote:

---

By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens' vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution

---

eric76 said:

---

Does anyone have a link to the lawsuit itself?

---

CondensedFoggyAggie said:

---

Well, now I know 5 states that will spend additional taxpayer money on lawyers.

---

vette said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

That Joe Biden would be president? Is this a real question?

---

txaggie_08 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

Quote:

---

By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens' vote, but their actions have also debased the votes of citizens in Plaintiff State and other States that remained loyal to the Constitution

---

It's right there in the article.

---

BusterAg said:

---

It doesn't appear that Texas is seeking any relief from SCOTUS here, just clarification.

---

Quote:

---

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

This would be a great precedent - states go around reversing other states elections based on narrow legal technicalities in how they were operated.

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

This would be a great precedent - states go around reversing other states elections based on narrow legal technicalities in how they were operated.

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

This would be a great precedent - states go around reversing other states elections based on narrow legal technicalities in how they were operated.

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

This would be a great precedent - states go around reversing other states elections based on narrow legal technicalities in how they were operated.

---

Bawahahahaahaha. Please quote CNN again for us and how supercomputers stole the election

---

Oh you mean the article(not from CNN) debunking the myth not endorsing it. You were utterly confused through the whole thread - thinking Georgia's ballots were counted electronically at touchscreens. When you finally figured out you had no idea how anything worked you name called and quit.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3163659/last#last

---