Supreme Court Denies Texas Election Challenge

Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Supreme Court has turned down the effort of Texas Friday that challenged the results of the presidential elections in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin.


The Court stated – “The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.”


However, the order does not hinder any other pending or future election appeals at the Supreme Court. The states meet on December 14th next week for the Electoral College to tally its votes – followed by a joint session of the House and Senate on January 6th to count the electoral votes and certify the winner.


Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas stated they would have heard the case without granting other relief, like issuing an injunction on electoral proceedings. They expressed “no view on any other issue.” And the actual vote county by the Court was withheld so it is unknown how the Justices voted.


Moments after the court’s decision, President Trump tweeted out one of his new campaign videos questioning elections integrity which was later censored and taken down by Twitter.


The Biden campaign lauded the decision and called the Texas filing “baseless.”




Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for President Trump, told Fox News’ “Hannity” Friday night that “the president’s legal team isn’t done with its election challenges.”


Giuliani stated – “The people of this country are entitled to a hearing on this. They should have at least given us a hearing so that we can present our facts and not just pushed it off to the side so no one would ever get to hear these facts.”


Texas Friday morning had filed a “reply brief” with the Court asking the it to hear its lawsuit. “Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief,” the Texas brief stated of the opposition briefs filed by Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia Thursday. Texas continued: “An injunction should issue because Defendant States have not and cannot defend their actions.”


The justices could have agreed to hear the case and promptly dismissed it or ruled in favor of Texas, or they could have requested oral arguments before ruling. They declined to hear it outright.


The basis of the Texas case was an argument that the four states unconstitutionally changed their election statutes in their judiciaries or executive branches, when only the legislature can make election law. The reply brief stated that the four states failed to adequately dispute their point.


The four states in their reply briefs did say that any changes that were made to their elections were consistent with laws approved by their legislatures and called out Texas for allegedly undermining the American election process.


Meanwhile, attorney Sidney Powell, who has been working on behalf of the Trump campaign stated on social media – “We made emergency filings in the Supreme Court Friday night for Georgia and Michigan … and, will be filing Arizona and Wisconsin shortly. These cases raise constitutional issues and prove massive fraud. Our plaintiffs have standing.”

And, there are a number of pro-Trump rallies planned for Saturday in Washington, D.C.