Federal judge dismisses Trump campaign lawsuit in Pennsylvania

“This court has no authority to violate the Constitution,” Judge Matthew Bran of the US District Court in Central District, Pennsylvania, wrote Saturday in a failed ruling, hours after the final round of litigation in the case came to court. The judge strongly rejected the Trump campaign’s bid to get rid of the vote in Pennsylvania, stating that Biden had won the state and that the results would be certified by state officials on Monday. Biden has a margin of more than 81,000 votes in the state.

“In the United States of America, this cannot justify denying a single voter the right to vote, let alone all voters in the sixth most populous state. Our people, our laws and our institutions demand more,” the judge wrote. “Essentially, the plaintiffs failed to shoulder the burden of filing a claim on which relief could be granted.”

Although the case is not always likely to succeed, supporters of President Donald Trump and his legal team – especially his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani – They pinned their hopes on a federal judge in Pennsylvania, lending some credence to their suspicions of fraud and amusement in Trump’s bid for annulment Biden’s popular vote.

But Bran, a well-known Pennsylvania Republican, refused.

This was the last major issue seeking to exclude or block enough votes that could cause a major country to swing in favor of Trump, and Bran’s decision on Saturday is at least the 30th loss or withdrawal of a cause from the Trump campaign and its allies since the election. day. There were only two wins in court for the Republicans, about very few votes.

See also  How much does a cleaning worker earn in Canada 2022? | salary | Salaries and benefits | the answers

“The plaintiffs are asking this court to deny nearly seven million voters the right to vote. This court has not been able to find any case in which the plaintiff sought such a radical remedy in challenging the elections, in terms of the sheer volume of votes required to be annulled,” Bran wrote Saturday. .

In this case, Trump’s legal team led by Giuliani attempted to claim a violation of the equal protection rights of two Pennsylvania voters because the state allowed counties to decide whether voters could fix absentee ballots that were sent out with technical problems. In the lawsuit, the two voters said that in their county, they were not permitted to “process” their ballot papers, and thus their ballot papers were rejected, while other counties, such as the densely populated Democratic County of Philadelphia, allowed voters to “process” absentee ballots. They contended that the discrepancy meant that the results of the entire Pennsylvania state election should be blocked by court order, which in theory would deprive Biden of the state’s 20 Electoral College votes.

Bran described the legal rationale behind the Trump campaign’s equal protection claim as a “Frankenstein monster.”

“The answer to invalid ballots is not the invalidation of millions of others,” Bran wrote.

Bran also blamed the Trump campaign for not providing any realistic evidence of voter fraud or other allegations – evidence that supporters of Giuliani and Trump have repeatedly said it is under preparation but never materialized. Multiple state election officials as well as judges said there was no widespread fraud in the 2020 elections.

Giuliani, who looked into the case at the last minute before a hearing on Tuesday before Bran, was widely criticized for ignoring legal reasoning, leading a team that made dirty mistakes in its files, and for pushing out meaningless and baseless conspiracy allegations. Against Trump in cities with democratic leanings.

See also  RD loses bronze to Canada at NORCECA U-17 – El Nuevo Diario (Dominican Republic)

“One might expect that in pursuing this astonishing outcome, the plaintiff would come armed with overwhelmingly convincing legal arguments and realistic proof of rampant corruption, so that this court would have no choice but to grant the proposed injunctive relief, unfortunately despite the impact on such a large group of citizens. But this did not happen. ” “Instead, this court was presented with tense, unfounded legal arguments and speculative accusations, unsupported in the spoken complaint and not supported by evidence.”

The counties in the state are due to certify their election results on Monday.

The judge said that any further consideration of the matter “would unnecessarily delay the resolution of the cases” related to the testimony, and closed the case. His order on Saturday indicates that the Trump campaign cannot attempt to re-feature their claims in a reconfigured version of the lawsuit.

The Trump campaign said, on Saturday evening, that they would quickly appeal Bran’s ruling, with the intention of referring the case to the US Supreme Court.

This story has been updated.

Kelly Mina contributed to this report.

Sacha Woodward

"Wannabe writer. Lifelong problem solver. Gamer. Incurable web guru. Professional music lover."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top