The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, a Pennsylvania state court, has newly rejected a lawsuit from Pennsylvania state Representatives who sought the invalidation of the state’s presidential election results. (President-elect Biden won Pennsylvania.) The court characterized their lawsuit as “an improper and untimely election contest,” explaining that under Pennsylvania law, “election contests” challenging the results of the presidential election must be filed within 20 days after Election Day in that particular race. Therefore, the court explains, the deadline for a “Class II” contest over the recently concluded election — meaning a court challenge focused on the presidential election results — was November 23. Nevertheless, the plaintiffs in this case filed their lawsuit on December 4.
BREAKING: Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court rejects last-minute suit from Republican state House Reps led by Daryl Metcalfe to roll back certification of the vote. This leaves the Texas challenge before SCOTUS as the only active court challenge to the state's results. pic.twitter.com/MfmkxzygNS
— Jeremy Roebuck (@jeremyrroebuck) December 9, 2020
At present, reporter Jeremy Roebuck says, the only active court challenge over the election results in Pennsylvania is a case that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, announced this week. Paxton — who’s reportedly been under FBI investigation for allegedly using his position for the benefit of a political donor — is seeking the invalidation of the state’s election results on the basis of the allegation that Pennsylvania unconstitutionally expanded mail-in voting ahead of the election. Paxton makes the same claims against Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia, where he also seeks to invalidate the presidential election results.
President Donald Trump, whose allies have repeatedly failed in their post-Election Day lawsuits across the nation, has praised Paxton’s lawsuit. On Twitter, Trump characterized Paxton’s lawsuit as “the big one” and said that his own team would apparently be intervening in the case in support of Paxton’s position. The case is before the U.S. Supreme Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over court fights between states, but — no matter the fact that three of Trump’s own nominees currently sit on the bench — there’s no particular indication that the court will rule in Trump’s favor. Just this week, the court rejected a case that Pennsylvania Republicans brought against the election results in their state, although the justices did not issue an opinion alongside their rejection.
We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 9, 2020
Broadly, Trump’s claims that fraud plagued the recent presidential election are not grounded in fact. Local election officials around the country, the Department of Homeland Security, and Attorney General Bill Barr have all confirmed that there’s no legitimate evidence of outcome-altering fraud. Claims to the contrary are based on ignorance, misunderstandings, and lies.