NEW: Judge Brann dismissed Trump campaign’s Pennsylvania lawsuit with prejudice…
Here’s the order dismissing the case and rejecting the Trump campaign’s attempt to stop Pennsylvania certifying Joe Biden’s win…
Will try to post a highlights thread later, but suffice it to say that this opinion excoriates the Trump campaign's legal strategy

Some highlights:

Judge Brann writes that the Trump campaign is seeking to "disenfranchise almost seven million voters", but has offered only "strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence."
Despite being <2 weeks old, the lawsuit has "already developed its own tortured procedural history," Brann writes, noting the Trump Campaign "made multiple attempts at amending the pleadings, and [has] had attorneys both appear and withdraw in a matter of seventy-two hours"
Judge Brann likens the campaign's equal protection claims -- the idea that D counties doing more to help people vote than R counties is unconstitutional -- to "Frankenstein's monster", saying the theory "has been haphazardly stitched together" to avoid controlling precedent
"That Plaintiffs are trying to mix-and-match claims to bypass contrary precedent is not lost on the Court," writes Brann, effectively saying: 'Did you really think I wouldn't notice?'
Brann says that yes the two individual voters who sued alongside the Trump campaign did suffer an injury because their counties (neither of which were named in lawsuit) rejected their ballots, but blocking PA from certifying its results only extends this harm to more people
"Prohibiting certification of the election results would not reinstate the Individual Plaintiffs’ right to vote. It would simply deny more than 6.8 million people their right to vote."

Brann says that not only does the Trump campaign not have standing to bring the case, it has not even "pled a cognizable theory" of its standing to bring the case
Brann writes that it is not an equal protection violations for some counties to do more to help people vote than others. "Expanding the right to vote for some residents of a state does not burden the rights of others."
But if the individual plaintiffs had shown such a violation, their remedy is unacceptable, Brann writes.

"Rather than requesting that their votes be counted, they seek to discredit scores of other votes, but only for one race. This is simply not how the the Constitution works."
Brann says that the Trump campaign's poll watcher argument "falls flat" because they don't actually allege their watchers were treated differently to Biden's and that its invocation of Bush v. Gore similarly fails because "they misapprehend the issues at play in that case"
Finally there's this footnote about the suggestion of blocking certification of only PA's presidential results:

"[E]ven if it were logically possible to hold Pennsylvania’s electoral system both constitutional and unconstitutional at the same time, the Court would not do so."
Judge dismisses Trump campaign lawsuit in Pennsylvania…
Trump campaign says it will appeal the ruling to the Third Circuit and ultimately to the Supreme Court.

Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis say their strategy is "to get expeditiously to the U.S. Supreme Court"
This statement references Judge Brann's appointment by Barack Obama, but neglects to mention that Brann is a Republican and Federalist Society member:…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with kadhim (^ー^)ノ

kadhim (^ー^)ノ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kadhim

19 Nov
While you're listening to Rudy Giuliani talk about massive, widespread fraud in Pennsylvania, recall this comment from Rudy Giuliani in court on Tuesday in the Trump campaign's main PA lawsuit

"All you gotta do to find out if I'm misleading you at all is to look at the lawsuits," says Giuliani
Sidney Powell, who also represents Mike Flynn, is now up - she is saying this all goes back to Hugo Chavez...
Read 15 tweets
19 Nov
The Trump campaign has voluntarily dismissed its federal lawsuit in Michigan, citing Wayne County initially not certifying its votes (but not citing the fact that Wayne County ultimately did certify its votes)… Image
Attached to the filings are affidavits from the two Republican members of the Wayne County board of canvassers.



According to AP, President Trump personally called both of them Tues eve. They signed the affidavits on Wed
Here's the Associated Press report:…
Read 6 tweets
10 Nov
Here's the memo William Barr issued today to US attorneys regarding the election "post-voting election irregularity inquiries," as first reported by AP…
It authorizes investigations "if there are clear and apparently-credible allegations of irregularities that, if true, could potentially impact the outcome of a federal election in an individual State."

Biden campaign advisor Bob Bauer: "It is deeply unfortunate that the Attorney General Barr chose to issue a memorandum that will only fuel the 'specious, speculative, fanciful or far-fetched claims' he professes to guard against."
Read 6 tweets
9 Nov
The Trump campaign has announced a new lawsuit in Pennsylvania, seeking an emergency injunction to stop state officials from certifying Joe Biden's victory in the state:…
The docket number for the case is 20-cv-02078 in the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Lawsuit mixes a variety of different allegations into a broad claim that the use of mail ballots in PA was suspect

Some of it complains about guidance issued by state officials months ago. Currently no affidavits to support other claims of irregularities

Read 6 tweets
6 Nov
Court hearing in the GOP Nevada case kicking off in 5 minutes.

Case is brought by four Nevada Republicans, rather than Trump campaign (despite the press conference they held yesterday)
GOP plaintiffs alleged that one of them was not allowed to vote in person because they had cast a mail ballot, which they deny.

Also claims issues with Clark County's signature verification software and that they weren't allowed to observe the vote count…
The Nevada Secretary of State, Barbara Cegavske (a Republican), responded in a filing that the claims are "absurd", "speculative", and "lack a factual or legal basis"…
Read 28 tweets
5 Nov
Hearing in this case kicking off now:

Judge Paul Diamond to the Trump campaign lawyer:

Diamond: Are your observers in the counting room?
Trump campaign: "There's a non zero number of people in the room"
Diamond: "I’m asking you as a member of the bar of this court: are people representing the Donald J Trump for president, representing the plaintiffs, in that room?"

Trump campaign lawyer: "Yes."

Diamond: "I'm sorry, then what's your problem?"
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!