Judge Dismisses Last-Ditch GOP Attempt To Block Biden Win

0
701

On Monday, a D.C. federal court dismissed a request from a slew of Republican plaintiffs seeking an order blocking the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory on January 6, when Congress is scheduled to meet and confirm the electoral college outcome. Plaintiffs included state legislators from Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia.

The original lawsuit hinged on a claim that certain states violated a Constitutional demand for state legislative direction of presidential elections because of the involvement in the process of officials from outside formal legislative bodies. Discussing the respective state laws that targeted states did, in fact, follow during the recently concluded presidential election process, the D.C. federal court observed that “Plaintiffs’ theory that all of these laws are unconstitutional and that the Court should instead require state legislatures themselves to certify every Presidential election lies somewhere between a willful misreading of the Constitution and fantasy.”

Issues plagued the lawsuit before getting to the foundation of the Republican plaintiffs’ argument. For instance, the plaintiffs failed to establish that they had the legal standing on which to bring their case. Although the plaintiffs alleged that they were “disenfranchised” because of certain state electoral practices, federal Judge James Boasberg noted in the new D.C. court order that their claim is “plainly not true.” In fact, the judge explained, the plaintiffs’ “votes have been counted and their electors certified pursuant to state-authorized procedures,” and any actual “vote nullification” would only occur in the event that the plaintiffs succeeded in their effort to block Biden’s victory. Every single state has long since certified its presidential election outcome, and every lawfully appointed member of the electoral college has cast their vote.

Remarkably, issues in the newly rejected Republican request go on from there. Boasberg notes that “Plaintiffs cannot simply sue anyone they wish here in the District of Columbia,” but the plaintiffs “never explain how a court in this city can subject to its jurisdiction, say, the Majority Leader of the Wisconsin State Senate.” As Boasberg explains, “Absent personal jurisdiction over a particular Defendant, of course, this Court lacks authority to compel him to do anything.” Boasberg suggested that the plaintiffs’ legal team could face “potential discipline” for their participation in the frivolous proceedings.

Overall, there has been no significant success story for Trump-allied post-election legal efforts at any point since Election Day, although Trump continues to push the completely false idea that there’s still a chance for him to secure a second term in office.