[ad_1]
In the ruling, the plaintiff sought to prevent the state government from certifying the election results, and the Federal Supreme Court rejected his appeal.
This lawsuit revolved around a Pennsylvania bill that abolished relevant regulations that “you must have a reason to vote in person before you can vote by mail,” vastly expanding the reach of voters by mail. The plaintiff claimed that the implementation of the bill was illegal and in conflict with the state constitution.
Last month, a Pennsylvania judge said the plaintiff was likely to win the case and prevented state officials from certifying the election results. But a few days later, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected the court order, leading to the case being appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Earlier Tuesday, election lawyers representing the government of Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit.
The lawyers added: “No court has issued an order to cancel the governor’s certification of the results of the presidential elections.” They believe that this may set a precedent for the judicial invalidation of the presidential elections.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, appointed by George W. Bush, is in charge of the case. The entire court ruling read: “The petition for an injunction presented to Judge Alito and presented by him to the court was rejected.”
Before this Pennsylvania appeal was dismissed, Texas also filed a lawsuit directly with the Supreme Court, accusing Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin of unconstitutionally changing election laws and treating voters unfairly. And through measures to relax the supervision of the integrity of the votes, which leads to serious electoral violations.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement: “The aforementioned states violated the regulations of the officially elected legislature and thus violated the constitution. These states ignore the state and Federal laws have not only tarnished the fairness of the referendum elections in this state, but they have also tainted Texas and all other states that have held legal elections. Their breach of the rule of law casts a dubious shadow on the overall election results. Now we ask the Supreme Court to intervene to correct this serious error. “
Officials from the respondent state contested the claims in the lawsuit.
In an emailed statement, Georgia Deputy Attorney General Jordan Fuchs said: “The allegations in the lawsuit are false and irresponsible. Texas claimed to be on the ballot in Georgia’s absence. There were 80,000 forged signatures, but they did not specify one of those people. That’s because that never happened. “
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (Dana Nessel) said that this lawsuit is a publicity stunt, not a serious legal defense.
Senior Republican Senator Cruz tweeted Tuesday night: “I am disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case that challenged the results of the Pennsylvania election. This appeal raises significant and serious legal problems. I think the court Responsibility to ensure that our elections comply with the law and the Constitution. “
(Jack Phillips and Ivan Pentchoukov contributed to this article.)
Editor in charge: Ye Ziwei #
