2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION LEGAL CHALLENGES UPDATE

So, where do we go from here? As most of you know by now, SCOTUS has declined to hear the lawsuit initiated by the State of Texas, (and joined by some 16 other states) against GA, MI, PA and WI that alleged fraud and other voting irregularities with respect to the 2020 presidential election. I have detailed these irregularities in previous blogs, and there is no need to repeat them here. Unless one has been living in a cave or getting their news exclusively from MSNBC or CNN you know what I am talking about.

As I understand it, SCOTUS’s reason was that these states lack the “standing” to sue other states over the election. So, what is “standing?” With respect to this case who, if anyone, would have it? I am not a constitutional lawyer, but I will give it my best shot. According to Wikipedia to have standing (or “locus standi”) one must have “sufficient connection to a harm from the law or action challenged.” The three elements of standing are (1) the plaintiff suffered a “concrete” injury; (2) the injury is traceable to the defendant’s or defendants’ actions; and (3) the injury would likely be redressed by a favorable decision.

What SCOTUS has ruled is that these states do not meet the above criteria. So, who, if anyone, would? More on that later.

Note to Trump-haters. Yes, you have won a significant victory, but before you celebrate you should be cognizant of the fine print. SCOTUS did not opine on the merits. In other words, it did not opine that there was not fraud. It just stated that Texas, et al. did not have the right to bring the case, leaving the possibility that some other party that meets the “standing” requirements, as denoted above, could. Whom would that be?

According to Rudy Giuliani and other attorneys I have heard the next step would be to present complaints of certain individuals whom it is believed do have standing to the attention of SCOTUS, such as the over 1,000 affiants and perhaps even President Trump and the electors in those states. This is a long shot to be sure, but it is a shot. Can SCOTUS ignore all of that? I don’t know, but I would like to find out.

CONCLUSION

I understand SCOTUS’ decision from purely a legal point of view. I don’t like it, but I understand it, and I accept that it may be the proper one. But, from a common sense point of view I think it was the worst possible decision. I would have almost preferred that SCOTUS had taken the case and decided there had not been any fraud or that the level of fraud had not risen to a significant enough level to reverse the election. This decision leaves open the possibility that there was fraud, but the perpetrators got away with it on a technicality.

Thus, the election will be plagued with uncertainty prospectively. Remember, according to the latest Fox News poll some 68% of GOP voters and 36% of all voters think the election was “stolen” from President Trump. SCOTUS’ decision will do nothing to resolve that. In fact, I think it will enhance it. I maintain that the people deserve a definitive answer, not one that will feed conspiracy theories and divide an already divided country even further.

Are the Trump campaign and its supporters “running out of road?” Is this the “end of the line?” Is the “fat lady” getting ready to sing? Probably. Unfortunately, I think the ramifications of this election will affect the country for some time.