Texas reply in motion for interim injunctive relief against GA MI WI PA Dec 11,”Inaction would disenfranchise as many voters as taking action allegedly would”
“Inaction would disenfranchise as many voters as taking action allegedly would”...Texas response to defendants motions
” This must be about stopping Trump”…Gabriel Sterling , GA election official
“The certification of Arizona’s FALSE results is unethical and knowingly participating in the corruption that has disenfranchised AZ voters,” …Jenna Ellis
One of the most important statements in the Texas response below is:
“Inaction would disenfranchise as many voters as taking action allegedly would”
The elephant in the room.
Let’s add more clarity to that.
Due to the documented disregard for state election laws, rampant ballot and voter fraud, machine malfunctions and manipulations and human error, we do not know who lawfully won the election.
This affects every citizen in the US and indeed of the world.
It certainly disenfranchises every voter.
Any illegal ballots tossed disenfranchise no one.
From
STATE OF TEXAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF
GEORGIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND STATE OF
WISCONSIN,
Defendants.
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER OR,
ALTERNATIVELY, FOR STAY AND
ADMINISTRATIVE STAY
December 11, 2020.
“REPLY IN SUPPORT OF INTERIM RELIEF
The State of Texas respectfully replies in support
of its motion for interim injunctive relief against the
States of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin and the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (collectively, the
“Defendant States”) and their agents, officers,
presidential electors, and others acting in concert.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant States do not seriously address grave
issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other
court venues and decisions in which Texas could not
participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that
Texas seeks and the justification for that relief. An
injunction should issue because Defendant States
have not—and cannot—defend their actions.”
“Second, Texas does not ask this Court to reelect
President Trump, and Texas does not seek to
disenfranchise the majority of Defendant States’
voters. To both points, Texas asks this Court to
recognize the obvious fact that Defendant States’
maladministration of the 2020 election makes it
impossible to know which candidate garnered the
majority of lawful votes. The Court’s role is to strike
unconstitutional action and remand to the actors that
the Constitution and Congress vest with authority for
the next step. U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 2; 3 U.S.C. §
2. Inaction would disenfranchise as many voters as
taking action allegedly would. Moreover, acting
decisively will not only put lower courts but also state
and local officials on notice that future elections must
conform to State election statutes, requiring
legislative ratification of any change prior to the
election. Far from condemning this and other courts
to perpetual litigation, action here will stanch the
flood of election-season litigation.”
”
CONCLUSION
The motion for interim relief enjoining Defendant
States from certifying Presidential Electors and from
having such electors vote in the electoral college until
further order of this Court should be granted.
Alternatively, this Court should summarily vacate
Defendant States’ certification of presidential electors
and remand to Defendant States’ legislatures
pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 2 and the Electors Clause.”
More here:
Citizen WElls 
Due to the documented disregard for state election laws, rampant ballot and voter fraud, machine malfunctions and manipulations and human error, we do not know who lawfully won the election.
This affects every citizen in the US and indeed of the world.
It certainly disenfranchises every voter.
Any illegal ballots tossed disenfranchise no one.
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2020
ORDER IN PENDING CASE
155, ORIG. TEXAS V. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL.
The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of
complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of
the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially
cognizable interest in the manner in which another State
conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed
as moot.
Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins:
In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a
bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original
jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___
(Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore
grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not
grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.
Click to access 121120zr_p860.pdf
This will take more legal prowess than I have to interpret.
The Supreme court can rule that canning your own vegetables constitutes an act of interstate commerce, because if you can your own vegetables, you are not buying a can of it in a store that came from another state.
But if one state has illegal laws in their election to elect a national leader, they can’t quite figure out how that could effect the citizens of another state.
Yes, i remember that they hid under their desks when obama presented phony birth docs., so i am not at all surprised that they are hiding under their desks again.
They feel that their is real danger if they adjudicate this lawsuit. The left might get really mad. Who knows what the left might do. So they’ll leave it alone. They presume that the right will just lay down and take it no matter badly they are rooked.
fhl
……….I couldn’t have stated it better myself. One hundred % agree.
At least they could’ve heard the case; that’s what we pay them for! If they don’t wanna do their job, i.e., hearing cases and making Constitutional decisions, it’s time to hang up their robes and go back to the private sector.
It seems as though there are no longer consequences for illegal and criminal acts.
AND,
……yesterday I asserted that SCOTAS has become a pack of whimpering DOLITTLES. Today I reiterate this statement. Grave damage done to the Republic…….which cannot be UNDONE. This will return to bite the SCOTUS on their rear ends BIG TIME. America’s highest court has NOW DEMONSTRATED that they are part, and parcel with America becoming a TOTALITARIAN government. This is exactly what happened in Germany in the early 1930s……..is there anyone reading this who is old enough to remember what followed?
INTERESTINGLY…….
………I am wondering what the clowns at the SCOTUS plan to do about the UNSEEN ARMY that has invaded America. Hiding under their desks, or wearing their black robes will NOT FRIGHTEN one single soldier in the unseen army. I have a gut feeling that sooner or later a member, or members of the 9 LEGAL FLEEGLES will discover he/she has been hit by a Covid bullet……..and we will hear their anguished screams forever after.
AND,
……….Joe Malarkey says he is going to get climate change UNDER CONTROL within the first 100 days he is in office. LOTS OF LUCK TO YOU MR. MORON…….YOU ARE UP AGAINST MOTHER NATURE, AND I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT YOU WILL WIN THE GAME THAT SHE PLAYS.
AND NOW,
………..America takes a step toward another possible CIVIL WAR. When Joe Malarkey’s goon squad led by the snotnose moron from El Paso attempts to force Americans to surrender ANY of their firearms Mr. Malarkey will discover there are still some UN-NEUTERED military veterans who will indeed object “strenuously”……..(mild assertion). Many might even take OFFENSE to having their firearms being stolen from them. The IDIOT CHILD (BETO) will discover that he is still a CHILD.
Alito and Thomas say they should hear the case, just not do anything about it.
The three judges that Trump appointed don’t even want to hear the case, let alone do anything about it. Let that sink in.