In Texas, Republicans have worked hard to impose burdens on voters — at least, within the state’s own borders. But now they have grander plans. On Tuesday, Texas
filed a lawsuit announcing its desire to interfere with voting processes in other states across the country. The lawsuit has no merit. It will fail. The effort though represents a galling expansion of Texas officials’ disregard for voters and the electoral process.
...
The litigation is legally incoherent, factually untethered and based on theories of remedy that fundamentally misunderstand the electoral process. At the core, it is an uninspired retread of the many state-level claims that https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-thought-courts-were-key-to-winning-judges-disagreed/2020/12/08/20f153f2-3913-11eb-aad9-8959227280c4_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_7 (already have imploded) since Nov. 3. Texas has simply delivered these defective claims in an even worse package.
Among the more novel flaws afflicting this lawsuit is that Texas should not have filed it. Texas does not have
standing in federal court to vindicate the voting rights of other states’ voters — much less standing to undercut the rights of those voters. Independently, Texas officials should not have filed these claims directly in the Supreme Court. Filing directly is improper because
other courts have been available to hear claims of this nature — and, indeed, other courts have heard and repeatedly rejected them.
Yet another, separate problem with this lawsuit relates to timing. Even if the claims were otherwise valid, Texas should not have brought them so late in the process. A fundamental principle of election law involves what’s called
laches, which is a principle that prevents litigants from filing challenges after an election when they could have been brought beforehand. This principle helps to ensure that voters, when casting their ballots, can rely on the rules set in place. Texas has filed its lawsuit over a month after the 2020 elections — and on the date of the https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/safe-harbor-law-locks-congress-into-accepting-bidens-win/2020/12/08/3afcb948-3914-11eb-aad9-8959227280c4_story.html?itid=lk_inline_manual_11 (safe harbor deadline), no less, which provides further assurance that Congress will accept the electoral votes of any state that has completed its post-election processes. This lawsuit runs headfirst into a veritable wall of laches.
To pile on further, the lawsuit demands a particularly inappropriate remedy: that the Supreme Court tell other state legislatures what to do. It appears impossible to square this extraordinary demand with basic constitutional principles, much less the Supreme Court’s
recently strengthened conception of states’ rights.
...
Ultimately, who knows what Paxton’s motivations might be. It is hard to understand why a person in a position of public service, who has taken an oath to defend the Constitution, would challenge an election through an incendiary lawsuit that even he, surely, knows is frivolous — a lawsuit that will do nothing more than inflame, frustrate and confuse. What is clearer is that the litigation will die an ignoble death, just like all the others. The end likely will come by way of a
short, dismissive order from the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, that order won’t stop Texas officials from continuing to try to chip away at the democratic process, both at home and beyond.