Reactions to SCOTUS' Texas Ruling and the Cases Still Out There

AP Photo/Mike Stewart

There’s all kinds of reaction coming in to the decision in the Texas vs. Pennsylvania case, with the Supreme Court declining to take up the matter, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the case.

As I reported, two Justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, disagreed and said that the Court did not have discretion to reject a case of original jurisdiction between states suing each other.

Reactions to the ruling ran the gamut.

We heard from the left that Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch were going to be shills for President Donald Trump. That obviously wasn’t the case. Not that Democrats would ever admit that.

Some were disturbed that Republicans didn’t take up the cause in the states earlier, before the election, when it was clear that the state laws were being flouted by election officials just changing the rules of the electoral process. Some tried but were unsuccessful in doing so.

The GOP in Texas was rip-roaring mad.

Mark Levin pointed out how this SCOTUS decision may ultimately hurt the Court because if Biden now gets in, while he has been silent on the issue, many of the Democrats behind him have said they intend to push for packing the Court. That would destroy the institution.

So where are we now? There are still cases wending their way through the state courts, including one in Wisconsin.

The plaintiffs in the Pennsylvania case just filed a petition for writ of certiorari, raising the following issues:

1. Do the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution permit Pennsylvania to rely on the laches doctrine to bar all forms of equitable relief for substantive constitutional challenges to election laws?

2. Do the Elections and Electors Clauses of the United States Constitution permit Pennsylvania to vi- olate its state constitution’s restrictions on Pennsylva- nia’s lawmaking power when enacting legislation for the conduct of federal elections?

We need to act in accordance with the Constitution to ensure that all states follow the law and comply with the Constitution, that they just don’t violate their own state laws to change the rules at the last minute. Because not doing so, does adversely affect their own citizens and the citizens of other states. Not rectifying such things makes Democrats and others think they can just make up the rules out of whole cloth, rather acting in in accordance with the law.

HT: Twitchy