[ad_1]
Pence argues that the legal issues raised by Gohmert, along with a list of Arizona Republicans, should be directed to the House and Senate (if they were to be raised at all).
Gohmert’s trial is a latest attempt by Republicans to persuade Pence to interfere with President-elect Joe Biden’s declaration of victory and overturn the election of President Donald Trump. The brief, filed with the Eastern District of Texas, does not say whether Pence would consider this possibility, but there is no public indication that he will.
“The plaintiffs have brought an emergency motion to this Court raising a host of important legal questions about how electoral votes for president are to be counted,” the Pence record says. “But the trial of these plaintiffs is not an appropriate way to resolve these issues because the plaintiffs sued the wrong defendant.”
Pence later adds: “(A) action to establish that the Vice President has discretion over the charge, brought against the Vice President, is a walking legal contradiction.
The lawsuit falsely claims the election was stolen by Democrats, citing unproven allegations of fraud that federal and state courts have rejected time and time again. Gohmert and the Republicans argue that the Electoral Tally Act unconstitutionally ties Pence to the state-certified Electoral College tally, claiming that Pence has “exclusive authority and sole discretion” to count states’ electoral votes.
“ Under the Twelfth Amendment, only defendant Pence has the exclusive power and sole discretion to initiate and permit the counting of electoral votes for any given state, and where there are competing voters lists, or when there is an objection to a single list of voters, to determine which voters’ votes, or if there are none, will be counted, ”argues the prosecution.
Pence’s brief underscored the irony of Gohmert’s argument. Ironically, Representative Gohmert’s position, if adopted by the Court, would in effect deprive him of his ability as a member of the House under the Electoral Count Act to raise objections to the counting of the electoral votes, then debate and vote. “
There were no credible allegations of voting issues that impacted the election, as claimed by dozens of state and federal courts, governors, state election officials, and departments. internal security and justice.
A member of the House and a Senator are required to mount an objection when Congress counts the votes. Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri on Wednesday said he would oppose the move, which will force House and Senate lawmakers to vote on whether to accept the results of Biden’s victory.
House Attorney General Doug Letter filed an amicus brief with the court on Thursday, calling for the Gohmert case to be dismissed, calling it “a radical departure from our constitutional procedures and consistent legislative practices.”
“The court should dismiss the complaint and dismiss the extraordinary and unprecedented remedy sought: a declaration that the Election Count Act is unconstitutional and an injunction that would interfere with traditional congressional procedures for counting electoral votes.” Complainants do not have standing; their claims are lace-up and their legal and constitutional claims – which this Court should not reach – are without merit, ”Letter said.
“Basically, this litigation is aimed at enlisting the federal courts in a belated and baseless attack on long-standing constitutional processes to uphold the results of a national presidential election,” the House prosecutor added.
Also on Thursday, attorney Alan Kennedy, voter for Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris in Colorado, asked to join the trial to oppose Gohmert.
<< (N) Neither the Constitution nor the Electoral Count Act allows persons who are not duly elected and certified presidential voters to replace duly elected and certified presidential voters only because those non-voters have not not elected, but would have liked to have been elected, causing their preferred candidates to lose their re-election, ”Kennedy said in court documents. “The claimants' claims to the contrary find no support in the text of the cited constitutional provisions or the law on the electoral count, and are contrary to the idea of holding elections.
This story has been updated with additional information.
CNN’s Jake Tapper and Kristin Wilson contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link