WhatFinger


President Trump seems set to continue castigating the Supreme Court for refusing to hear these cases that could have changed the election results

Trump blames Supreme Court inaction for 2020 election loss



Trump blames Supreme Court inaction for 2020 election lossPresident Trump has used his first major speech at CPAC since the 2020 election to blame the Supreme Court’s failure to hear a number of cases challenging the constitutionality of the Democrats election strategy as the reason for his loss. Trump detailed the Democrats strategy in these terms:
“The democrats use the China virus as an excuse to change all of the election rules without the approval of their state legislatures, making it therefore illegal. It had a massive impact on the election. Again, you have to go to the legislatures to get these approvals. This alone would have easily changed the outcome of the election at levels that you wouldn’t have even believed. Even with COVID, even with all of the things, the numbers are staggering. We can never let this or other abuses of the 2020 election be repeated or happen again. Can never let that happen again.”
Trump was articulating that the Democrats’ strategy was unconstitutional for the following reasons:
  1. Under Art. II, §1, cl.2 of the US Constitution: "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.
  2. Art. II, §1, cl.2, does not permit state courts and state executive officials to alter the rules by which presidential elections are conducted. Only state legislatures have that power.
Trump indicated how the Democrats’ executed their strategy and why it succeeded:
“It is undeniable that election rules were illegally changed at the last minute in almost every swing state with the procedures rewritten by local politicians … you’re not allowed to do that … and local judges. They want more time, they want this, they want that. All done by local politicians or local judges, as opposed to state legislatures as required by the Constitution of the United States. And these are just numbers that are massive. These aren’t little numbers, these are numbers that in each state is a transformative number. It changes the outcome of the election. And it’s not close. Regardless of your political views, this should concern you as a constitutional matter”.

Support Canada Free Press


Trump was particularly withering in his criticism of the Supreme Court’s failure to hear a Bill of Complaint filed by STATE OF TEXAS against COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, and STATE OF WISCONSIN which questioned the constitutionality of the Democrats' strategy:
“They didn’t have the courage, the Supreme Court, they didn’t have the courage to act, but instead used process and lack of standing. I was told the President of the United States has no standing. It’s my election, it’s your election. We have no standing. We had almost 25 … if you think of it … we had almost 20 states go into the Supreme Court so that we didn’t have a standing problem. They rejected it. They rejected it. They should be ashamed of themselves for what they’ve done to our country. They didn’t have the guts or the courage to make the right decision. They didn’t want to talk about it. We had the case led by the great State of Texas. 18 States went in. “You don’t have standing.” Let’s not talk about it. They didn’t have the guts to do what should be done.”
Several other cases raising the same issues in which President Trump was the appellant also received the same treatment. President Trump seems set to continue castigating the Supreme Court for refusing to hear these cases that could have changed the election results.


View Comments

David Singer -- Bio and Archives

David Singer is an Australian Lawyer, a Foundation Member of the International Analyst Network and Convenor of Jordan is Palestine International—an organization calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor States to the Mandate for Palestine. Previous articles written by him can be found at: jordanispalestine.blogspot.com


Sponsored