Sen. Cruz Publicly Implores SCOTUS to Hear Pa. Election Challenge

SCOTUS Election Challenge!

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, publicly urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday to hear the expedited appeal of a case challenging the election results in Pennsylvania, saying the matter “raises serious legal issues.”

Cruz, the longest serving solicitor general in the history of Texas and a former law professor at the University of Texas Law School in Austin, is the first U.S. senator to publicly support the appeal, filed by Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa.

“Hearing this case now – on an emergency expedited basis – would be an important step in helping rebuild confidence in the integrity of our democratic system,” Cruz said in statement that also noted a Reuters/Ipsos poll found 39% of Americans believed the election was “rigged.”

Kelly’s appeal argues the Pennsylvania legislature passed legislation greatly expanding the use of absentee voting, making it a “no-excuse” mail-in election and contradicting the state’s Constitution. It further derides the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for dismissing Kelly’s lawsuit for “laches,” a legal term for a procedural issue saying the case was brought too late.

Cruz was especially critical of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s dismissal on the procedural ground.

“Even more persuasively, the plaintiffs point out that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has also held that plaintiffs don’t have standing to challenge an election law until after the election, meaning that the court effectively put them in a Catch-22: before the election, they lacked standing; after the election, they’ve delayed too long,” Cruz said. “The result of the court’s gamesmanship is that a facially unconstitutional election law can never be judicially challenged.”

Dick Morris: Enough Episodic Evidence to Establish Pattern of Voter Fraud

There is enough episodic evidence to establish a pattern of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, according to political strategist Dick Morris.

“I think that the issue of scale, you have obstruction from the secretaries of state, you have obstruction from the courts, the Democratic-controlled courts, and it’s very hard to penetrate that to get evidence enough to reverse several million votes, but there certainly is enough episodic evidence to establish a pattern of fraud,” Morris told Tuesday’s “American Agenda.”

Morris also questioned Attorney General Bill Barr’s statement earlier Tuesday that the Justice Department had uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would tip the results of the presidential election.

“I’d like to know the number of people they had doing it and what they did,” Morris said. “But this fraud was so deeply concealed within the voting machines that it was almost undetectable. You would need a top-level forensic computer expert to go in there and detect it.

“These voting machines were designed by people who worked for Hugo Chavez with the sole intention of creating a system that could be hacked without anyone knowing about it, results that could be flipped, votes that could be altered, and I’m not sure DOJ probed it to that level.”