Today on the menu: States are certifying their votes, and Trump’s legal team is in turmoil.
The 2020 Election Starts to Wind Down
Michigan and Pennsylvania are set to certify their election results today, and Nevada is scheduled to do the same tomorrow.
Saturday night, U.S. district judge Matthew W. Brann threw out the Trump campaign's lawsuit seeking to prevent the certification of Pennsylvania's vote tallies and to reject the vote tallies from Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Philadelphia, Montgomery, and Northampton counties. Judge Brann concluded that the Trump campaign did not have standing to bring the case, failed to prove a violation of the equal-protection laws, and contended the campaign's argument, "like Frankenstein's Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together from two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent." Brann dismissed the case "with prejudice," which sounds forceful or emphatic but legally means the case is dismissed permanently and cannot be resubmitted. Nonetheless, the decision was about as thorough and sweeping a rejection as a judge could possibly write. Our Andy McCarthy offers his legal assessment here. ...
| | | WITH JIM GERAGHTY November 23 2020 | | | WITH JIM GERAGHTY November 23 2020 | | | | Today on the menu: States are certifying their votes, and Trump’s legal team is in turmoil. The 2020 Election Starts to Wind Down Michigan and Pennsylvania are set to certify their election results today, and Nevada is scheduled to do the same tomorrow. Saturday night, U.S. district judge Matthew W. Brann threw out the Trump campaign's lawsuit seeking to prevent the certification of Pennsylvania's vote tallies and to reject the vote tallies from Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Philadelphia, Montgomery, and Northampton counties. Judge Brann concluded that the Trump campaign did not have standing to bring the case, failed to prove a violation of the equal-protection laws, and contended the campaign's argument, "like Frankenstein's Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together from two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent." Brann dismissed the case "with prejudice," which sounds forceful or emphatic but legally means the case is dismissed permanently and cannot be resubmitted. Nonetheless, the decision was about as thorough and sweeping a rejection as a judge could possibly write. Our Andy McCarthy offers his legal assessment here. ... READ MORE | | | | |
| |
Comments
Post a Comment