Finally, the moment we’ve all been waiting for, the Supreme Court of the United States, decides to review a case challenging the American election results. But it’s not a case that alleges a stolen election. Read on with Circle of Legal Trust to learn more about the recent lawsuit that could overturn the election results.
Supreme Court to Hear Case That Challenges American Election Results
A lawsuit is on its way for a conference in the US Supreme Court in the coming weeks, and it’s not alleging that authorities stole the 2020 presidential elections. The case is against the majority of Congress that failed to investigate the 2020 election rigging, jeopardizing national security. According to the complaint, Congress failed to uphold its oath to protect the country’s constitution from foreign and domestic threats.
Not many people are aware of the Brunson v. Adams case, where four brothers pursued civil action requiring the removal of President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and 291 US representatives. The complaint also seeks the removal of 94 US senators who certified the Electors to the Electoral College on January 2021. It alleges that the President, Vice President, US representatives, and US senators failed to investigate the allegations of serious election fraud and foreign interference in the 2020 presidential elections.
The report states that any relief provided would be in the form of restoring Donald Trump to the presidency. According to the report, national security interests are of utmost importance, and because of that, the case bypassed the appeals court and directly moved to the US Supreme Court. The court will now be hearing the case. If four of the justices provide their votes in support of the case, it will move the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari forward.
What’s surprising is that the US Supreme Court chose to hear such a case two years after the vote to bring Joe Biden as the United States president. Better late than never, right? However, whenever such cases threaten the integrity of federal agents or officers, the democrats often pass legislation in the Congress session that imposes term limits on federal justices.
Such infringements on the court’s independence often motivate the justices to review high-profile cases like these.
Although it has been two years since the electoral fraud allegations, it is a serious issue affecting American democracy. Violations carried out by public officials are a breach of their constitutional oath.
The report also sheds light on how social media giants, under the influence of the FBI, started censoring bad or negative news about Joe Biden days before the presidential election. Such influence is a clear violation of the First Amendment that not only rigged the election but also brought forward a “criminal puppet government.”
The Supreme Court has a huge decision ahead of them in preventing a storm cloud of civil unrest that may arise from the continuous constitutional violations and undermining the public trust. When criminals break the law, it is the law enforcement authorities that instill peace and restore balance by taking the necessary action, but when the law enforcement and federal agencies violate the constitution, it is the US Supreme Court that the people look towards for justice.
Before January 6, 2021, more than 100 members of Congress put a notice alleging electoral fraud and the need for an elections commission to carry out an investigation. Unfortunately, that did not happen.
SCOTUS to Review Case Challenging American Election Results: Can the Independent State Legislature Doctrine Change the Course of American Law?
The independent state legislature theory states that the constitution gives authority to regulate federal elections within the state without any checks and balances. In 2000, three US supreme court justices invoked the independent state legislature theory in the Bush v. Gore case, which sought to stop the recount of votes in Florida during the 2000 US presidential election.
In the right hands, the independent state legislature theory can alter the power within the states and even subvert the election results. The North Carolina Supreme Court determined that the congressional districts drawn up by the republicans were purely in favor of the republican party, and such actions violated the North Carolina constitution.
However, the republican speaker and many GOP legislators took the case to the US Supreme Court, requesting the court to overrule the decision made by the state supreme court. They argued that the state courts had no authority to alter redistricting plans.
The case Moore v. Harper is ongoing and has become one of the most high-profile cases taken up by the US Supreme Court. Republicans are asking the US Supreme Court to take the ability of the state courts to review election law under the state’s constitution. However, some analysts believe that the two justices, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, could be the ones that tilt the possibility of a five-vote majority.
The supporters of former president Donald Trump are now relying on the independent state legislative theory to overrule the 2020 presidential election results. Those in favor of the independent state legislative doctrine reference a prior Supreme Court decision that provides state legislatures the power to set election rules, not the state court, the state judges, or any other party.
People against the “radical” independent state legislative theory believe that the if the US Supreme Court gives state legislatures unfettered authority to set election rules, it could adversely affect democracy and further deepen the mistrust among American citizens. To understand more about independent state legislative doctrine, read about the Democratic National Committee v. Wisconsin State Legislature case.
This year, the Supreme Court has two major cases to hear, Moore v. Harper and another involving a case about the voting rights act. Would the Supreme Court take the big decision of calling the 2020 elections fraud and holding the US representatives, senators, and other federal officials responsible for weakening the American democracy?