Active Now

Discussion » Questions » Current Events and News » State of Texas suing GA, MI, WI and PN over changes to their election rules. Will go straight to SCOTUS. Will they prevail? .

State of Texas suing GA, MI, WI and PN over changes to their election rules. Will go straight to SCOTUS. Will they prevail? .


Texas suing means no state courts. Texas wants Trump-electors or a do-over of the election.

What happened?

The State of Texas just filed a lawsuit against Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Wisconsin.

Why is this relevant and how is it different from the other lawsuits?

The other lawsuits have mostly been filings made by or on behalf of the voters in each state with the claim that they have been disenfranchised. For instance, a Georgian voter or the Georgian Republican Party filing a lawsuit. The first court for these is the state-level courts, which are (as we know) infiltrated by leftist activist judges. The state-level judges have been throwing out the lawsuits claiming procedural issues like filing too late or that the person filing it has "no legal standing." These lawsuits thus have to be appealed to the Supreme Court on various points of law (mostly regarding constitutionality) and the states themselves will start arguing that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to hear some of these matters which should be left to state courts.

The new Texas lawsuit however is the State of Texas itself making a claim that if these phony results are certified and electors are selected on the basis of the phony results in these states, Texas' own electors are being disenfranchised. Since the State of Texas is the claimant, the only appropriate court is the Supreme Court.

What is the remedy Texas is asking for
Texas is asking for (in summary)

1. An injunction stopping the states from certifying the results
2. An injunction stopping the states from appointing electors based on those results
3. Direction to each state's legislature to appoint new electors if electors have been appointed based on the phony results or appoint no electors at allirection to conduct a special election to appoint electors

4. Essentially, Texas seems to be asking for a special election (a do-over) in each of these states. The legislature can appoint Trump-electors too of course but they would never have the balls to do that.

What are the grounds on which the lawsuit is brought?

This lawsuit provides a very helpful overview and summary of the cases which are being brought in each state: 


1. Unlawful changes to voting rules (removing signature verification
2. Poll workers kicked out / not allowed to observe in breach of election rules
3. Curing ballots which was against state law - only allowed in mostly Democrat counties
4. On Nov 2nd (day before election!), records show that 2.7m mail-in ballots were sent out. On Nov 4th (day after election!), records show
 1m mail-in ballots were sent out. How is this possible?!
5. Late / problematic ballots were not segregated (contrary to Alito's order), mixed in with legitimate ballots making it impossible to trace.


  1. Unlawful changes to the process of verifying/counting absentee ballots 

Due to this, the rejection rate on mail in ballots was 0.37% in 2020 versus 6.42% in 2016!


  1. Unlawful changes to voting rules making it easier to vote by absentee ballot and destroying safeguards (are we starting to see a pattern here?!)
  2. Secretary of State technically had no power to distribute a single absentee ballot!
  3. Poll watchers and inspectors kicked out
  4. Rules were not followed when opening and counting the ballots, statutory signature verification requirements were completely ignored
  5. 174,000+ absentee ballots counted without a registration number, probably because the same ballots were run through machines multiple times at the TCF counting center
  6. Threats of violence to the Republican canvassers that initially voted not to certify but were threatened by the leftist mob and later recanted via affidavit.


1. Unlawful changes to voting rules... You don't even need me to repeat this first one do you...
2. Hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in the 5 biggest Democrat cities
3. Election officials literally encouraged people to declare themselves as "indefinitely confined" to get around signature verification and photo ID.
4. Addresses were written onto envelopes where there was none in order to accept some absentee ballots with no addresses
5. Ballots were backdated

What are the merits / are we likely to be successful?

The answer is that the merits are there but the only obstacle is whether the SC thinks the remedy Texas is asking for is appropriate.

To explain briefly, it is almost beyond doubt that these states changed rules unlawfully, kicked vote watchers out etc. Like there is literally no way the Democrats/States can say that there was no fraud without calling every witness a liar, every video doctored and somehow justifying what the election officials literally declared.

The problem is the remedy. It is open for the judges to say that there was fraud afoot but not enough fraud to require a revote, or an injunction against certification/electors. This is why you see in every case/hearing, Rudy / Lin / Sidney emphasizes the number of illegal ballots. So the challenge for Texas is to prove that the harm done by the illegal ballots is enough for the SC to provide the remedy that it wants.

Posted - December 8, 2020


  • 15422
    Don't the states get to decide how to run their election processes?  Where does Texas come off dictating to other states what to do and how does one state disenfranchise voters in another state?  Surely there must be ore to this than you've mentioned.  
      December 8, 2020 10:31 AM MST

  • 24506
    Yes. The Constitution specifically gives the right to the states. 

    It gives it to the state LEGISLATURES.  The states in question did not make changes through the legislature. Rules were changed via Governor's executive orders, election boards and state courts.  Some of the changes were not uniform throughout the individual states. 

    Because it is a national office it alleges that an Unconstitutional elec tion effects all states that held a Constitutional elec tion.

    Case was filed late on Dec 7. Because it is between states it goes directly to SCOTUS. 

    I have not read most of it...just skimmed it. (Nearly 100 pges)  Do not know if it gets into the computers or not. This post was edited by my2cents at December 8, 2020 2:23 PM MST
      December 8, 2020 11:23 AM MST

  • 15422
    Let us know what the SCOTUS decides.
      December 8, 2020 11:30 AM MST

  • 24506
    If it matters, I will likely not be the first one to mention it. But I will certainly be following up. 
      December 8, 2020 11:35 AM MST

  • 15422
    Of that I have no doubt.
      December 8, 2020 1:05 PM MST

  • 13933
    The Supremes have original jurisdiction over cases where two (or more) states are adversaries.  They will hear the evidence and make a ruling.  No trial court and/or appeals courts. This post was edited by Thriftymaid at December 8, 2020 5:21 PM MST
      December 8, 2020 4:40 PM MST

  • 24506
    Do they have to hear it or can they dismiss without hearing it? 
    I seen one site is reporting it is "on the docket", does that mean they will definately hear the evidence? This post was edited by my2cents at December 9, 2020 6:05 AM MST
      December 8, 2020 5:24 PM MST

  • 13933
    The court has given the defendants until Thursday afternoon to respond to the filing of the suit.  Eight states have joined Texas as plaintiffs!  
      December 8, 2020 7:38 PM MST

  • 24506
    Yay! Here we go. 
      December 9, 2020 6:04 AM MST

  • 13933
    Now 17 states have joined.

    From an article on
    Besides Missouri and Alabama, the other states joining the Texas lawsuit are Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia. This post was edited by Thriftymaid at December 9, 2020 8:27 PM MST
      December 9, 2020 7:52 PM MST

  • 1937
    Let's hope that they prevail. Louisiana has also joined Texas in this lawsuit. There may be others as well.
      December 8, 2020 6:35 PM MST

  • 24506
    Last I heard 8 other states have joined.  I will be contacting my AG etc today to get MO on that case as well.
      December 9, 2020 5:49 AM MST

  • 8852
    SCOTUS voted 9-0 not to be bothered with the Pennsylvania case, so don't hold your breath. When is enough enough with all of this crap?
      December 8, 2020 7:16 PM MST

  • 15422
    Really!  How many times do these folks have to be slapped down before they realize they're not going to change the results of the election?
      December 9, 2020 8:12 AM MST

  • 8852
    Following up on my earlier answer, do you really think that any court should or will decide to throw out millions of ballots and disenfranchise all the people who cast them? It's not going to happen, and why would you want it to? Is Trump winning so important to you that you want it by any and all possible means? Does the end justify the means no matter what?
      December 8, 2020 8:49 PM MST

  • 24506
    I want the election fraud fixed. I want the cheaters exposed and put in jail. I want the judges and politicians to know they do not get to pass laws that they do not have the authority to pass.  This is not just about this election. This is about election integrity for this year and in the future. 

    Does the ends justify the means? People/organizations/States/etc are NOT breaking the laws. We are not burning cities, rioting, stealing or beating people. We are using the law and courts to challenge what we believe was cheating. And there is NOTHING wrong with the means. And if we expose and eliminate the fraud....there is also nothing wrong with the ends. 
      December 9, 2020 5:58 AM MST

  • 8852
    But, for the 815th time, WHERE IS THE PROOF?
      December 9, 2020 7:05 AM MST

  • 24506
    Google it. I have given some to you. You dismiss it without even looking at it. 

    Over 500 legal witnesses. Video of illegal counting after sending media and observers home. 

    Many listed in my question description. 
      December 9, 2020 7:10 AM MST

  • 8852
    But not nearly enough to affect the outcome. The basic issue is that Trump cried foul, and Breitbart, Newsmax et al have perpetuated the claims of cheating. However, court after court after court, including SCOTUS yesterday, has ruled that Trump has no case. If Trump hadn't started this nonsense in the first place, nobody would believe it. You can't teach a child that 2+2=5 and then claim the education system is broken because your kid thinks 2+2=5. That's what this amounts to. And isn't it funny that Republicans always are about suppressing votes rather than counting them so that participation in the election process is minimized? As if "free and fair elections" means suppressing the vote. Since many of the objections are about what supposedly happened in urban areas with large minority populations, it seems to be mainly about suppressing the black and minority vote.
      December 9, 2020 7:44 AM MST

  • 24506
    Then do the investigations and prove it is not enough to effect the result. 

    The video in GA of illegal counting has more than 10x enough to effect the result.  10k vote difference and there was over 100K ballots counted illegally.  Video is not even disputed by the state. We been through this. People only see what they want to see. 

    Do the investigations, fix the fraud, and never let something like this happen in our country again. That is what I want. That is something every American should want a free, legal, fraud free election. 
      December 9, 2020 8:39 AM MST

  • 8852
    WRONG. The onus is on Trump to prove that it did happen, not on Biden or anyone else to prove that it didn't. Our system is innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. And every court has ruled that Trump's side has not met the burden of proof.
      December 9, 2020 8:47 AM MST

  • 24506
    AGAIN The video in GA is slam dunk proof.  100K ballots illegally counted....difference is only 10K votes.  GA law says this makes the election invalid. 

    In our system, we investigate when there is an alleged crime.  The victim does not have to prove the guilty party before we investigate.  

    We have proven the system needs to be investigated. 
    Rules changed by people who have NO legal right to change the rules according to the US Constitution
    Votes flipped 
    Illegal counting
    Observers kicked out without being replaced
    No signature verification 
    Backdating of ballots
    All of this has been witnessed and in some cases on audio and video...but they hide behind the "not enough to effect the result."  These judges just do not want to be the judge who ruled against the violent leftists.   Hopefully SCOTUS will not have that fear....they have Secret Service and US Marshall protection. 
      December 9, 2020 9:57 AM MST

  • 15422
    (ORDER LIST: 592 U.S.) TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2020 ORDER IN PENDING CASE 20A98 KELLY, MIKE, ET AL. V. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. The application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is denied.

    This was today's unanimous decision by the Supreme Court of the United States.  They refused to stop Pennsylvania from certifying the election in favor of Trump.  
      December 8, 2020 9:33 PM MST

  • 8852
    They refused to stop Pennsylvania from certifying the election in favor of Trump Biden.
      December 8, 2020 9:44 PM MST