Motion says these states have "tainted the integrity of their own citizens' votes".
Chutzpah thy name is suing four states whose citizens didn't vote the way you'd have liked them to vote so run to the Supreme Court six hours before safe-harbor day expires to file a motion that has no basis in law to disenfranchise all of them.
Just discovering that this news broke a few hours ago while I was teaching but the documents have just been docketed at the court. Here is @rickhasen’s post featuring @steve_vladeck’s analysis electionlawblog.org/?p=119395
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There are three emergency religious challenges to COVID public-health orders pending at SCOTUS: out of New Jersey, Kentucky and Colorado. A few thoughts on where they may be going.
Remember: Court sided with religious challengers in the New York cases on eve of Thanksgiving (lifting 10-person attendance restrictions at houses of worship in red zones) & on that basis sent California challenge to ban on indoor worship back to the lower court for another look.
Colorado was just filed, but briefing is complete in the NJ and KY cases and orders could come at any time.
Interesting that NJ hasn't come down yet, as reply brief was filed 5 days ago. SCOTUS acted on the CA request less than two days after briefing was complete.
NEW at SCOTUS: Donald Trump has filed a brief intervening in Texas v. Pennsylvania, the lawsuit urging SCOTUS to scrap election results in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Georgia
On the opening page, Trump says it is "no surprise" that "nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen" — since he won Florida and Ohio.
The document appears to be a brief-length version of the president's Twitter account.
In the self-imploding challenge to the Pennsylvania election results pending at SCOTUS, 23 House Republicans file an amicus brief with this puzzling closing.
Yes, "stitch" is misspelled. And beats me what the "many more" things to be "saved down the road"...are.
NEW: Trump election challenge now at SCOTUS. Pennsylvania state representative challenges election results in his state, saying it was illegal for state legislature to expand mail-in voting late last year.
After re-reading Kavanaugh’s concurrence in Roman Catholic Diocese v. Cuomo, I see it’s going to take a re-evaluation on his part if the Court is to uphold public health measures in CA, NJ & KY. 1/10
While I would hope that Kav & others would be more hesitant to meddle with state-level measures as covid reaches crisis levels in those places and elsewhere, I’m not confident they will. 2/10
Kavanaugh is more measured than Gorsuch and acknowledges that even severe restrictions on church attendance could be justified — but says that as long as just *one* secular venue is open while churches are closed, the state is violating free exercise. 3/10