Legal experts have almost universally dismissed the Texas lawsuit as an improper stunt. Citing the Supreme Court’s “original jurisdiction”, Texas asked justices to act as a trial court to settle an interstate dispute, a procedure theoretically possible under the Constitution but used sparingly. , usually in cases involving water rights or border disputes.
In a series of briefs filed Thursday, all four states Texas has sought to prosecute condemned the effort. “The court should not accept this seditious abuse of the court process and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuses must never be repeated,” a brief for Pennsylvania said.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton responded in a response brief on Friday morning. “Whatever definition of sedition in Pennsylvania,” he wrote, “urge this court to address serious threats to Texas’ right to vote in the Senate and the franchise of its citizens in elections. presidential elections confirm the Constitution, which is the complete opposite of sedition. “
Allegations that the election was tainted with widespread fraud have been refuted, including by Attorney General William P. Barr, who said this month that the Justice Department did not uncover any electoral fraud “at a scale that could have had a different result in the election. “
About 20 Democratic-led states, in a brief supporting the Four Battlefield States, urged the Supreme Court to “reject Texas’ last-minute attempt to dismiss the results of a popular election and safely supervised and certified by its sister states. “
Georgia, which Biden won by less than 12,000 out of nearly five million votes, said in its brief that it handled its election with integrity and care. “This electoral cycle,” the brief states, “Georgia did what the Constitution gave it: it implemented the electoral processes, administered the election in the face of the logistical challenges caused by Covid-19, and confirmed and certified the election. results – over and over and over again. Yet Texas sued Georgia anyway.