[ad_1]
The Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear Donald Trump’s lawsuit seeking to overturn his loss to Joe Biden in Battlefield State, bypassing a ruling on the merits of the claims and deciding the case instead must first make its way to the lower courts.
The loss on a 4-3 decision on Thursday was the latest in a string of losses for Trump’s post-election lawsuits. Judges in several battlefield states have dismissed his allegations of fraud or irregularities. Dissenting Tory judges said the ruling would “stain” the election result forever.
Trump asked the Tory-controlled court to disqualify more than 221,000 ballots in the state’s two largest Democratic counties, alleging irregularities in the way postal votes were administered. His trial echoed claims that had previously been rejected by election officials in those counties in a recount that barely affected Biden’s margin of victory of around 20,700 votes.
Trump had wanted the court to take the case directly, saying there was not enough time to fight the legal battle starting first with a lower court given the looming December 14 date when presidential voters have voted. But lawyers for Democratic Governor Tony Evers and the State Department of Justice argued that the trial should begin with lower courts.
Swing Judge Brian Hagedorn joined three Liberal justices in dismissing the petition without weighing in on Trump’s claims.
Hagedorn said the law is clear that Trump must take his case to lower courts where factual disputes can be resolved.
“We do well as a judicial body to live up to time-tested judicial standards, even – and perhaps most importantly – in high-profile cases,” Hagedorn wrote. “To follow this law is not to ignore our duty, as some of my colleagues suggest. He follows the law. “
It was not immediately clear whether Trump would continue to pursue the case in lower courts. Her campaign spokesperson did not immediately return a message asking for comment. Trump filed a similar lawsuit in federal court on Wednesday.
Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, in her dissent, said she would have taken the case and referred the case back to lower courts for factual findings, which could then be sent back to the Supreme Court for decision.
Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley wrote that the court is “waiving its duty” by failing to determine whether election officials have complied with the law and that inaction would undermine public confidence in the election.
“While some will celebrate or denounce the court’s inaction depending on the impact on their preferred candidate, the importance of this case transcends the results of this particular election,” she wrote in a dissent joined by Roggensack and Judge Annette Ziegler. “The inability of the majority to act leaves an indelible stain on our last elections.”
Trump’s trial challenged procedures that have been in place for years and that have never been found to be illegal.
He claimed there were thousands of mail ballots with no written request on file. He argued that the electronic journal created when a voter requests a ballot online – the way the vast majority is requested – does not follow the letter of the law.
He also challenged ballots where election clerks filled in the missing address information on the certification envelope where the ballot is inserted – a practice that has long been accepted and that the state election commission told the clerks that everything is fine.
Roggensack said the Supreme Court owed it to the public to determine whether this opinion was correct, especially for future elections.
“However, this does not necessarily result in the strike of the postal ballots that were issued following incorrect advice from the WEC,” she wrote. “The remedy sought by the petitioners may be out of reach for several reasons.”
Trump also challenged mail-in ballots where voters declared themselves to be “confined indefinitely,” a statute which exempted them from presenting photo ID to vote, and which has been used significantly more this year due to the pandemic. The court ruled in March that it was up to individual voters to determine their status.
Two more Conservative lawsuits are still pending and the court is seeking to invalidate the ballots. In addition to Trump’s federal trial, there is another in federal court with similar claims from Sidney Powell, a conservative lawyer who has been removed from Trump’s legal team.
Wisconsin certified Biden’s victory this week, paving the way for a Democratic voters list chosen earlier to vote the state’s 10 electoral votes in his place.
[ad_2]
Source link