Trump's lawyers dismissed their case, saying they had reached a settlement with Brad Raffensperger. Not only was this a lie, say Raffensperger's lawyers, who SPECIFICALLY TOLD THEM there was no settlement, but you talked to our client without our consent!
At the point where you're saying a President can't be impeached for speech that can't be criminally punished, for instance, if he said the time had come to put people in concentration camps, I have to wonder whether you understand that impeachment is a political remedy.
At that point, why not just say that impeachment is a bill of attainder?
Some have memorably said that if the electoral college were not in the constitution, it would be unconstitutional. That seems to be the argument here.
Also, if there were ever an absolutely radioactive political question that no court would touch, it would be whether the grounds for impeachment were legally permissible.
I went through the transcript of the phone call, and I went through the OCGA, and I can honestly say that I don't identify a crime.
The closest Trump comes is solicitation to receive a thing of value for an official act, but he doesn't offer a concrete thing.
The vague threat of a crime might work if Raffensperger were an "officer of the court," like a probation officer, but here, I don't think he qualifies.
Remember that criminal laws are written by professional politicians, who create the broadest possible laws to address, for instance, possession of an imitation drug, and some of the narrowest when it comes to their own wheeling and dealing.
Oh man the Trump campaign has filed an emergency petition to the Supreme Court of Georgia and I'm already loving the excuse for them forgetting to pay the filing fee:
"There was just so much gosh darned evidence the computers must have clogged"
Ok, so the argument here is that Judge Russell in Fulton County isn't qualified to preside over their election challenge because she's an active judge who lives in Fulton County.
She hasn't issued any rulings yet, but they want an emergency order for a new judge.
This is not great. "Lots of stuff keeps going wrong with these filings and none of it is our fault, please help."
And then, it certainly sounds like they aren't even sure they've filed a motion for a different judge.
The Constitution specifically says that state legislatures are responsible for choosing how electors are chosen. Letting other states decide for them, or claim injury if they don't like their choice, would violate the Constitution.
And of course, it's not just standing here, but laches. Waiting until after the election to file these lawsuits means that tens of millions of people could lose their vote, in which they have a liberty interest, without notice or a hearing.
That also violates the Constitution.
And also, it just doesn't make sense to allow ordinary people to sue because one branch of government has usurped the power of another, without injury. We don't typically sue to vindicate other people's rights.
Conservatives understood this concept for emoluments.