LEGAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED TO SCOTUS: Elections In PA, Et al, are Void

[UPDATE: We are now encouraging all members of the State Legislatures in the seven named States to join this suit, by intervening as relevant parties. You may do this by entering a Motion To Intervene with the United States Supreme Court.]

This is the Legal Argument section of the Motion For Leave To File Bill of Complaint For Declaratory Judgment invoking the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court. The filing requests a declaration that the 2020 Presidential Elections in Pennsylvania; Michigan; Georgia; North Carolina; Arizona; Wisconsin; and Nevada, are void under federal statute, 3 U.S.C § 1. The action also requests a second declaration, that federal statute, 3 U.S.C § 2, provides the only legal mechanism available now for the Defendants to appoint electors.

This was filed with the Supreme Court on Dec. 3, 2020, in an Emergency Application For Expedited Review sent to Justice Alito. And final papers were submitted to the full Court on Dec. 4, 2020. Due to Covid-19, papers may take up two days for clearing security. Names will be unredacted after the case appears on the United States Supreme Court docket. You may download the PDF directly from this blog at the following link, or you may scroll or download from the Scribd file below:

30 Responses to “LEGAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED TO SCOTUS: Elections In PA, Et al, are Void”

  1. “Whereas Plaintiff’s vote was canvassed according to law in the State of __________, which did choose electors on November 3, 2020.”

    Since all of the state’s continued to count votes after November 3rd, what is the criteria you are using to say that the plaintiff’s state choose electors on the 3rd?

    • naturalborncitizen Says:

      According to the unanimous SCOTUS decision in Foster v. Love, “the election” is the combined efforts of voters and officials to make a selection on Election Day. The Court refused to pare down exactly what was required to make that selection, but whatever it is, the Court said it had to be done, the winner had to be decided, “on Election Day”. If a State uses a popular election, and if there’s no doubt as to who will win the State at midnight, then that State chose on Election Day. It doesn’t matter whether they still count votes after midnight if those votes have no realistic chance of changing outcome. They chose on time. States that were too close to call failed to choose, and are void as per 3 U.S.C. 1 & 2.

    • What about certification by those states? Can the Court say that there’s no legal process defined by the states to determine “too close to call” therefore it is reasonable to believe that the states choose when they “certify” the election? This is really an interesting case you have made as Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch was making Election Day argument a few weeks back.

    • naturalborncitizen Says:

      No. It’s been decided as high as 9th Circuit, that early voting is fine, because Congress encourages absentee voting before and up to Election Day, as long as election is not consummated before Election Day. Therefore, if you didn’t have to choose until after Election Day, there would be no Election Day, just a nebulous period undefined, before and after what? That construction renders the statute inoperable on its face. And SCOTUS in Foster v. Love wasn’t having that argument at all. Listen to oral argument (I posted link) in light of the unanimous opinion, especially Justice Scouter’s discussion with counsel, as he wrote the opinion.

  2. Leona Tonchen Says:

    Yesterday, on Jan 11, 2012, “The Objectively Gray (Scotus Recurred Issue)”, p.4, was missing. ???

    • He is a total hack. But that’s beside the point. The legislature is sidestepping the issue by even asking for a special session. They don’t need the governor to call anything. All the legislators need to do is hold a zoom meeting if they want to and pass a simple majority resolution.

    • naturalborncitizen Says:

      Exactly right, mrjr101.

  3. […] Respecting the Constitution? « LEGAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED TO SCOTUS: Elections In PA, Et al, are Void […]

  4. naturalborncitizen Says:

    Please keep threads on topic.

  5. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  6. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  7. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  8. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  9. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  10. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  11. […] takes area on Election Day and not days and months after Election Day.  There is actually a lawful argument submitted to the Supreme Court producing this […]

  12. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  13. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  14. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  15. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  16. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  17. […] takes place on Election Day and not days and weeks after Election Day.  There is actually a legal argument submitted to the Supreme Court making this […]

  18. What us the status of LEGAL ARGUMENT SUBMITTED TO SCOTUS: Elections In PA, Et al, are Void?

  19. I got the answer as I read Charles Hughes post on December 10. Thanks!

  20. […] I have provided strong argument that the Eleventh Amendment does not prohibit original jurisdiction for this case at SCOTUS, such […]

  21. […] States Supreme Court has flagrantly violated its Rules, and it is now claiming not to know where my papers and $300 check are, even though they received all papers on December 4, 2020, proved by my […]

  22. […] States Supreme Court has flagrantly violated its Rules, and it is now claiming not to know where my papers and $300 check are, even though they received all papers on December 4, 2020, proved by my […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: