Motion for leave to file bill of complaint, Texas v. Pennsylvania et al.
www.scribd.com
View attachment 1777067 View attachment 1777068 View attachment 1777069 View attachment 1777070
Actually, the entire lawsuit from Texas is based on precedent already set by the Supreme Court. Their specific angle against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin and Michigan is that their entire election was unconstitutional because they changed the rules around just prior to 11/3, they conducted their elections in a way that violated their
own election laws and Constitutional election laws in general, and in the case of Pennsylvania, the state did not properly segregate all of their ballots from before and after the deadline, making it
completely impossible to determine which ballots are which, effectively ruining the entire batch.
You could absolutely posit the argument that it's
unfair that ballots, even legal ones, are discarded if they aren't tabulated before the end of the day, but that's the way it's always been carried out. It's called election day, not election week or election month. If the state was incapable of tabulating all of its ballots before the deadline, that's not the responsibility or the failing of the Union, that's the failing of the state to adhere to the standard to which everyone else is being held, the standard to which everyone else--even
Florida-- was capable of performing.
If a single state holds their election in a way that violates the Constitution and alters the outcome of the election for all other states concerned, I don't think it's unreasonable for the other states to sue them as a result. It's like I said:
This is a very interesting circumstance.