Republicans file another delusional lawsuit today:
Gohmert v. Pence.
Text of complaint linked here.
Last week, I explained why Pence can't overturn the 2020 election b/c of the 12th A. & the Electoral Count Act.
This GOP complaint is nonsense.
/Thread/
electioncases.osu.edu/wp-content/upl…
2/ My thread last Friday here:
"I've been getting inquiries worrying that Pence will block the Biden electoral college win when he presides in the Senate on Jan 6.
Don't worry.
Neither the 12th A nor the Electoral Count Act gives him that power."
3/ I turned the thread into this blogpost linked below (for easier sharing with my non-Twitter-using anxious older relatives).
Next, I'll explain why this new lawsuit is baseless and moot.
shugerblog.com/2020/12/26/pen…
4/ The Republicans' very first legal claim is an obvious misrepresentation of the 12th Amendment. They claim the 12th A. grants the vice president "exclusive authority and sole discretion... to determine which slates of electors may be counted."
Nonsense.
5/ Did they even read the 12th Amendment?
The only part about the VP:
"The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates."
"SHALL OPEN ALL"
6/ Full sentence from 12th A:

"The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Reps, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted."

If the drafters wanted the VP to do the counting, why didn't they say that?
law.cornell.edu/constitution/a…
7/ It would have been far easier to write "shall open all the certificates and *count* the votes."
Instead, they repeated the language from the original 1787 text and switched to passive voice:
"The votes shall then be counted."
By whom?
Implicit but clear: the House & Senate.
8/ It would be bizarre to switch from the active to passive voice without intending the counters to be the people explicitly present (Senators and Reps)
But the passive voice leaves open the rules for counting, implicitly inviting Congress to fill in that deliberate space.
9/ See the Necessary & Proper Clause, Art I, Sec 8:
“Congress shall have Power...To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Govt...”
Like the details of counting.
10/ On page 2 is their most outrageous (and moot!) argument:
They pretend they are relying on Article II's reference to "state legislatures" as the deciding body for the Electoral College...
But all of Biden's electors were certified in accordance with each state legislature!
11/ Art II Sec 1:
"Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors..."

Accepting their argument that the deciding body is the state legislature, Biden still wins 306-232.

All the states certified following state legislation.
12/ No state legislature selected any alternative Trump slate.
Even if we accept the Republicans' own argument, it changes not a single vote.
Moreover, the Electoral Count Act creates no relevant problem. Each state legislature granted the state executive a role in certifying.
13/ The point is that even if one accepts the Republicans' argument that the Electoral Count Act improperly assigns power to the "state executive," when a state legislature *could have* bypassed the state executive in some alternate universe, nothing like that happened here.
14/ For entertainment, I recommend reading the full complaint's statement of "facts."

Bad-faith delusional gymnastics to create an alternate reality where MAGA make-believe dungeons & dragons electors meet outside on state capitol grounds to become "the legislature's slate."
15/ Finally, for now, regardless of the GOP's moot complaint about the "executive" in 3 USC 6, Congress still passed a Safe Harbor relying on *state legislation*.
It governs any dispute, and Biden's electors were all certified on time.
It's over.
16/ One more point: In case you're worried about a Senate fililbuster to run out the clock on counting Electors, the Electoral Count Act sets a time limit on debate about each state at 2 hours. 3 USC 17.
Not even Mitch McConnell can run out that clock.
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Jed Shugerman

Jed Shugerman 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!

PDF

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 @jedshug

27 Dec
Fitzmagic with one of most amazing plays ever, due to a flagrant facemask while throwing blind...
But also the dumbest Raiders coverage imaginable w/ 18 seconds left, no TOs, needing 50 yards...
espn.com/video/clip?id=…
2/ The Raiders should want the Dolphins to try a short pass or anything in the middle of the field.
Instead, CB Damon Arnette (20) plays WR Hollins close to the line, fails to bump him, and lets him run right by.
Meanwhile LB Cory Littleton plays the short middle of the field...
3/ Here is Arnette letting Hollins get behind him, but the key error is LB Cory Littleton inexplicably breaking toward the middle of the field at the 40 (where he should want the pass to be caught!) instead of breaking to the deep sideline (the only place that matters!)
Read 4 tweets
25 Dec
I've been getting inquiries worrying that Pence will block the Biden electoral college win when he presides in the Senate on January 6th.
Don't worry.
Neither the 12th A nor the Electoral Count Act does not give him that power.
*Short* thread 1/
2/ The 12th Amendment merely designates the President of the Senate (the VP) to "open all the certificates." But then uses the passive voice: "the votes shall then be counted."
Implicitly, Congress does the counting.
The Electoral Count Act is more detailed on the count process.
3/ Sorry for the double negative in the first tweet.
I meant:
"Neither the 12th A nor the Electoral Count Act gives [the Vice President] that power."...
Read 12 tweets
24 Dec
A worthy 3d option if Trump self-pardons, @eliehonig @AshaRangappa_:
3) DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel writes the first in-depth memo explaining why self-pardons are invalid. New AG says declining to prosecute is discretion, not acceptance.
Then let state prosecutors indict Trump.
I get the need to negate the damage Trump has done.
But sometimes "negating" doesn't mean prosecuting.

We can undo Trump's damage by restoring DOJ independence, using executive power thoughtfully, & embracing federalism.
Let's avoid Pardon Panic:
To all of you celebrating Christmas, merry Christmas.
As a progressive Jew, I'll embrace Christmas & mercy:

Let's stop hating on pardons.
Yes, Trump is abusing this power, and I've proposed moderate judicial checks, but let's not over-react/ over-correct.
More mercy, not less.
Read 5 tweets
21 Dec
Read this by Erica Newland, who worked in DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel 2016-18, showing a glimpse of Steve Engel's disastrous role.

Sessions & Barr are household-name villains, but it's time to examine other lawyers who enabled Trump's crimes.
/Thread. nytimes.com/2020/12/20/opi…
2/ In this thread, I focus on one pivotal episode in which Engel covered up key facts about Trump's Ukraine bribery/conspiracy felony.
Engel tried to bury the whisteblower complaint.
Some background/reminder first:
cnn.com/politics/live-…
3/ The phone call was July 25, 2019.
The whistleblower filed a complaint w/ IG Atkinson Aug 12, who found it "an urgent concern" on Aug 26.
Under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, the DNI (Maguire) should have sent it to Congress w/in 7 days...
Read 9 tweets
18 Dec
Self-pardons are bad, but the unprecedented suggestion of "un-pardons" is worse.
Lord have mercy, so to speak.
This op-ed is also yet another example of the "pardon panic" genre that gets pardon law and Burdick embarrassingly wrong:
Pardons are not confessions of guilt.
@CBHessick:
I am calling for a complete and total shutdown of pardon op-eds until breathless pundits take a deep breath, actually read Burdick, and figure out what is going on.
(I'm tagging Carissa because she has been so right on these questions. She did not write this op-ed, to be clear!)
Read 4 tweets
8 Dec
This thread on Doug Jones as AG raises problems of the modern Crony AG model, as opposed to what I’ve called the Professional or Politico model - at precisely the time we need more professional independence at DOJ.
Jones would be a Crony mistake, either real or perceived.
2/ My article here from 2019 on the Professional/Politico/Crony models for AG in US history.

If I hadn't seen this thread, I'd have set Jones more as "professional" (long-term background w/in DOJ). But Biden picks Jones, how can he not be seen as a Crony?
ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol87/iss5…
3/ Democrats picked more Crony AGs in the first half of the 20th century. But since Nixon, Republicans generally picked Crony AGs.
No Democrat has appointed a Crony AG since JFK had his brother RFK.

I sincerely hope Biden does not make a Cronyist mistake.
Read 5 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!