“Far-reaching consequences”: how the US reacted to the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the election results lawsuit

"Far-reaching consequences": how the US reacted to the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the election results lawsuit

The US Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit filed by the Texas attorney general seeking to invalidate the presidential election results in several states where Joe Biden won. Earlier, representatives of 17 US states had backed the suit, which was aimed at delaying the appointment of the electoral college. In his turn, the chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, Allen West, proposed the creation of a Union of States where the provisions of the US Constitution would actually be respected.

The US Supreme Court rejected Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s suit to overturn the presidential election results in key states – Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – won by Joe Biden.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court said Texas had failed to make a convincing case that the state had the right to make such a claim.

“The state of Texas has not demonstrated a legally valid interest in how elections are conducted in other states. All other pending motions are dismissed as frivolous,” the court said in its ruling.

In his lawsuit, the Texas attorney general argued that the states in question changed voting rules, thereby violating the U.S. Constitution and setting the stage for widespread election irregularities and fraud.

One of the goals of the suit was to postpone the confirmation of members of the electoral college from Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

The Texas attorney general’s lawsuit was supported by 17 other states where local governments are controlled to some extent by Republicans. They filed a petition to the Supreme Court of the USA on behalf of Amicus curiae (“friends of the court”) – interested persons who are not parties to the case and voluntarily submitting competent opinions to the court on the issues in question.

Donald Trump himself supported the lawsuit and asked to be included as an interested party. After the Supreme Court dismissed the Texas lawsuit, the US president said the court had shown “neither wisdom nor courage”.

Recall that Joe Biden won the November 3 election in several key states at once on the popular vote, which earned him the necessary 270 electoral college votes. Two days later, on 14 December, the electors are due to meet and, after a vote, confirm Biden as the new US president.

After the electoral college vote, Donald Trump and the Republican Party will no longer be able to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

Democrat reaction

Joe Biden’s campaign spokesman Mike Guin called the Supreme Court’s decision expected, adding that Trump’s attempts to challenge the result of the presidential election were unfounded.

“There is nothing surprising about this decision. Dozens of judges, election organisers from both parties and even Donald Trump’s attorney general rejected his baseless attempts to challenge his electoral defeat. President-elect Biden’s clear and convincing victory will be ratified by the electoral college on Monday and he will be sworn in on January 20,” he was quoted as saying by CNN.

For his part, New Jersey Democratic Congressman Bill Pascrell Jr. called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to take action against the 106 Republicans in Congress who supported the suit.

“Simply put, people who want to tear the government of the United States apart cannot be members of Congress. Lawsuits filed to destroy public confidence in our democratic system by nullifying the clear outcome of the 2020 presidential election represent a trampling on the spirit and letter of the Constitution, which every member of Congress is sworn to uphold and defend,” Pascrell Jr. wrote in his letter.

The Democrat stressed that the lawsuits were filed “in violation of House rules that expressly prohibit congressmen from engaging in improper conduct that would adversely affect the reputation of the House.”

However, USA Today, which reported on Pascrell Jr’s letter, notes that Pelosi is unlikely to take any action against the Republican MPs.

The Finish Line

Despite numerous attempts and lawsuits filed in courts of different instances, Donald Trump and his supporters have failed to influence the outcome of the presidential election.

However, the US media noted that many of the lawsuits filed by Republicans were poorly prepared and lacked any supporting evidence.

It is worth noting that Trump and his lawyers have also been criticised by his own supporters. In late November, prominent Republican radio host Rush Limbaugh said that the president’s team had promised to release damning evidence of election violations, but nothing of the sort had happened.

The same criticism was leveled at Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson, who said he had asked lawyer Sydney Powell to share evidence of fraud on his show. However, she did not provide any evidence of wrongdoing and demanded that attempts to contact her cease.

But not all Republicans have come to terms with the Supreme Court’s decision, which rejected Texas’ suit to overturn the election result in key states.

For example, Allen West, chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, released a statement suggesting a union of states adhering to the Constitution.

“In rejecting Texas’ lawsuit, which was supported by 17 states and 106 congressmen, the Supreme Court ruled that any state can take unconstitutional action and violate its own election laws, and this will have detrimental consequences for law-abiding states, while the guilty state will bear no responsibility. This decision sets a precedent that states can violate the US Constitution with impunity. It will have far-reaching consequences for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should unite and form a Union of states that will uphold the Constitution,” West said in a statement.

However, according to Yury Rogulyov, director of the Franklin Roosevelt Foundation for US Studies at Moscow State University, this is a purely political statement that will not have any consequences.

“The Supreme Court is a US government body that is not elected and is not responsible to the voters, which is why it rejected this lawsuit,” the expert explained.

For his part, political analyst Alexander Asafov said in a conversation with RT that Donald Trump will probably continue to insist that the election was conducted with irregularities.

“It’s actually a clear defeat, but Trump will try to continue to challenge the election results, he will claim that Supreme Court justices dismissed the lawsuit under pressure. Such attempts will continue after Biden’s inauguration. We can expect Trump’s legal staff to come up with new ways and lawsuits to prove that Biden lost the presidential election,” the expert said.

As for the Texas Republican chairman’s statement, it is unlikely to turn out to be an attempt by a number of states to separate themselves from the central government in Washington, Asafov added.

“It can be expected that there will be attempts on the part of states led by Republicans sympathetic to Trump to form a pro-Trump coalition. But this will not have any domestic political consequences – Trump will not be able to become president of a part of the US, as it is against the country’s constitution,” the political scientist stressed.

Overall, the Supreme Court’s decision is unlikely to bring more discord to America’s political life, which it already has enough of, the expert added.

“The internal political situation in the US is complicated and heated, but such alarmist statements will not make things worse. Of course, efforts have already been made by Biden and his entourage to explain to the electorate that the election results are legitimate, but this is unlikely to change the general mood and state of society,” Asafov concluded.