Donald Trump appeals after federal judge rejects Pennsylvania election lawsuit

0
43


President Donald Trump is appealing a federal judge’s rejection of his campaign’s effort to block certification of votes in Pennsylvania.

The President and other plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals on Sunday, a day after the judge issued a scathing order dismissing allegations of widespread irregularities with ballots postal vote.

The deal has always been a long one to prevent the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden, but given Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes at stake, it was the campaign’s best hope to influence election results through courts.

Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani appeared in court for the first time in decades to argue the case last week.

President Donald Trump appeals federal judge’s rejection of campaign effort to block certification of votes in Pennsylvania

Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani appeared in court for the first time in decades to argue the case last week

Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani appeared in court for the first time in decades to argue the case last week

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann wrote in his order that Trump had asked the court to deprive nearly 7 million voters. In seeking such a “surprising outcome”, he said, one might expect a complainant to provide compelling legal arguments and “factual evidence of rampant corruption” – but “it did not happen. product”.

The Trump campaign had sought to prevent state officials from certifying the results of elections in the state.

Brann described the case as “unfounded strained legal arguments and speculative accusations.”

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the complaint with prejudice

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the complaint with prejudice

The judge said he “did not have the power to take away the right to vote from just one person, let alone millions of citizens.”

The lawsuit before Brann was filed on Nov. 9 and had alleged inconsistent treatment by county election officials of the postal ballots. Some counties have informed voters that they can fix minor flaws such as missing “secret envelopes”, while others have not.

“This claim, like Frankenstein’s monster, was put together at random,” Brann wrote.

The Trump campaign responded by issuing a statement denouncing the “Obama appointed judge” while vowing to fight all the way to the Supreme Court.

“Today’s decision is proving to help us in our strategy to get to the United States Supreme Court quickly,” Trump campaign lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis wrote in their statement.

Brann, appointed by former President Barack Obama, is a Republican and, according to his biography, a fellow of the Federalist Society, a group of conservative and libertarian lawyers, law students, and academics.

Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani said in a statement he was disappointed with the ruling and would appeal. “Today’s decision is helping us in our strategy to get to the US Supreme Court quickly,” he said.

According to Giuliani, the campaign will ask the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to review the decision on an accelerated schedule. The majority of the judges on this circuit have been appointed by Republican presidents. Four were nominated by Trump.

For Trump to have any hope of calling off the election, he must reverse the result in Pennsylvania, which is expected to be certified by state officials on Monday.

“Today’s decision is a victory for the rule of law and for the voters of Pennsylvania, which the Trump campaign has sought to deny their rights over the most fragile legal theory imaginable,” wrote the expert on electoral law Rick Hasen on Twitter.

The Trump campaign and its supporters have filed dozens of lawsuits in six closely contested states. The campaign’s only victories extended polling day hours at a handful of polling stations in Nevada and set aside some provisional polls in Pennsylvania, court records show.

Attempts to thwart the certification of elections failed in courts in Georgia, Michigan and Arizona.

In the Pennsylvania case, Brann also rejected a campaign request to amend the trial to allege violations of the US Constitution. The campaign wanted Brann to allow the Pennsylvania Republican-controlled state legislature to nominate voters who would support Trump in the Electoral College vote on December 14.

Under Pennsylvania law, the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state gets all the electoral votes in the state.

A presidential candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the election, and Biden leads the electoral vote count by 306-232.

Electoral votes are distributed among the 50 states and the District of Columbia based approximately on population.

“It goes to the Supreme Court”: Trump campaign denounces “Obama appointed judge” who wrote Pennsylvania court decision

Rudy Giuliani

Jenna Ellis

The two top lawyers in the Trump campaign – Rudy Giuliani (left) and Jenna Ellis (right) – released a statement on Saturday denouncing the Pennsylvania federal judge and vowing to take their fight to the Supreme Court.

The two lawyers leading the Trump campaign’s legal efforts to challenge the election results, Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, released a statement in response to the ruling saying they intended to appeal to the highest court from the country.

“Today’s decision is helping us in our strategy to get to the United States Supreme Court quickly,” the statement said.

“While we strongly disagree with this opinion, we are grateful to the Obama-appointed judge for making this early ruling quickly, rather than just trying to run out of time. “

The statement continued, “We will seek an expedited appeal to the Third Circuit.

“There is so much evidence that in Pennsylvania, Democrats ruled out our opportunity to present 50 witnesses and other evidence that election officials blatantly ignored Pennsylvania law denying independent scrutiny.

“This resulted in 682,777 ballots cast illegally, intentionally or not.

“This is just an extension of Big Tech, Big Media, Corrupt Democrat censorship on damning facts the American public needs to know.

“We are disappointed that at least we did not have the opportunity to present our evidence at a hearing. Unfortunately, the censorship continues.

“We hope the Third Circuit will be as courteous as Judge Brann in deciding our appeal one way or the other as quickly as possible.

“This is another case that seems to be moving quickly to the United States Supreme Court.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here