Ted Cruz spoke out today about the Pennsylvania election case currently being pushed by the Trump campaign. That case was dismissed by the liberal Pennsylvania Supreme Court and an appeal is now needed. While Cruz has previously been bearish on Trump’s legal challenges, now he’s urging the Supreme Court to grant the emergency appeal.
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) December 1, 2020
The Daily Wire provides a bit more context.
On Tuesday, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) publicly called on the Supreme Court to hear an emergency appeal challenging the election results in Pennsylvania, arguing that the Democrat-led Pennsylvania legislature’s vote last year to allow universal mail-in voting flew in the face of the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition of such a move.
Cruz wrote, “Today, an emergency appeal was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the election results in Pennsylvania. This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the Court should hear the case on an expedited basis.”
“The Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting, except in narrow and defined circumstances,” Cruz explained. “Late last year, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail-in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition.”
“This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game,” he continued. “If Pennsylvania wants to change how voting occurs, the state must follow the law to do so.”
Cruz also noted the issue with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissing the suit based on a technicality called “laches.” That essentially means that the plaintiff waiting too long to file their complaint. Cruz says that Trump’s campaign has convincingly argued that standard hasn’t been evenly applied and that the case should have moved forward.
As to the actual challenge, I wonder how viable it is if it makes it to the Supreme Court. I suppose that’s why you get it there and take your shot. Cruz appears to believe there’s some merit here and he’s obviously a man of great legal experience. The question will be just how involved the nation’s top court wants to get. We know John Roberts will want no part of this, but he’s no longer the swing vote. Will the other conservatives be interested? Or will at least one of them decide it’s not something they want to touch?
There are a lot of outstanding questions. I wish we had more answers, but the situation now is one of waiting and seeing.
(Please follow me on Twitter! @bonchieredstate)