Ted Cruz agrees to argue Pennsylvania case before Supreme Court if review is granted.

0 7,323

Senator Ted Cruz has agreed to argue a Pennsylvania case before the United States Supreme Court if the matter is accepted for review. The intermediate appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision denying the relief the President was seeking.   

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has plenty of experience arguing before the high court; he argued before the Supreme Court in the Bush vs. Gore case, the Independent Sentinel reports.

“This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the Court should hear the case on an expedited basis,” Cruz said in a statement.

Cruz’s full statement reads as follows:

Today, an emergency appeal was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the election results in Pennsylvania. This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the Court should hear the case on an expedited basis.

The Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting, except in narrow and defined circumstances. Late last year, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail-in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition.

This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game. If Pennsylvania wants to change how voting occurs, the state must follow the law to do so.

“The illegality was compounded by a partisan Democrat Supreme Court in Pennsylvania, which has issued multiple decisions that reflect their political and ideological biases. Just over a month ago, Justice Alito, along with Justice Thomas and Justice Gorsuch, wrote-correctly, I believe-concerning the Pennsylvania court’s previous decision to count ballots received after Election Day, that ‘there is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution.’

Cruz also noted the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issue dismissed the suit on a technicality — “laches.” That means that the plaintiff waited too long to file their complaint. Cruz says that Trump’s campaign has convincingly argued that the standard hasn’t been evenly applied. Therefore, the case should have moved forward.

It was a crazy Catch 22,” the Independent sentinel reported.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.