https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/12/08/explosive-texas-asks-supreme-court-to-block-unlawful-election-results-in-swing-states-n1197400 Shared via Right News http://news.rovinemedia.com/app/share/
Late Monday night, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed a motion 分词urging the U.S. Supreme Court to block key swing states from certifying “unlawful election results” in the presidential election, instead urging the Court to remand the election results to state legislatures for review. The lawsuit urges the Supreme Court to direct state legislatures to reverse the unlawful actions of election officials by choosing Electoral College electors themselves.
星期一晚上，德克萨斯州检察长肯·帕克斯顿（Ren）提出了一项动议，敦促美国最高法院阻止主要摇摆州在总统选举中证明“非法选举结果”，而且敦促法院将选举结果退还给州立法机关进行审核。 该诉讼敦促最高法院指示州议会通过自己选择选举团的选举人来扭转选举官员的非法行为。
Paxton’s brief on behalf of Texas contests the results in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
帕克斯顿（Paxton）代表得克萨斯州（Texas）的情况介绍会挑战佐治亚州，密歇根州，宾夕法尼亚州和威斯康星州对结果。
“As set forth in the accompanying brief and complaint, the 2020 election suffered from significant and unconstitutional irregularities in the Defendant States,” Paxton argues in the brief, first reported分词 by Breitbart. The Texas brief lists three kinds of violations of federal law:
帕克斯顿在由布赖特巴特首先报道的摘要中指出：“如随附的摘要和申诉所述，被告州2020年选举遭受了严重的违宪违规行为。”德克萨斯州的摘要列出了三种违反联邦法律的行为：
Non-legislative actors’ purported amendments to States’ duly enacted election laws, in violation of the Electors Clause’s vesting State legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors. Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters, with more favorable allotted to voters – whether lawful or unlawful – in areas administered by local government under Democrat control and with populations with higher ratios of Democrat voters than other areas of Defendant States. The appearance of voting irregularities in the Defendant States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States’ election laws.
非立法行为人声称对各州已正式颁布的选举法进行了修正，这违反了选举人条款赋予全州立法机构关于总统选举人选的授权。州内在选票待遇上的差异，在民主党控制下的地方政府管理的地区以及与被告州其他地区相比民主党人选民比例更高的地区，无论是合法还是非法，票数分配得更优惠。 在被告州中，这与这些州的选举法中违反宪法规定的放宽投票完整性保护是一致的。
These three broad claims echo many of the Trump campaign’s lawsuits 分词challenging the presidential election results in those states.
这三个广泛的指控呼应了特朗普竞选团队中许多挑战这些州总统选举结果的诉讼。
The Electors Clause in the U.S. Constitution states宾语从句 that only state legislatures may direct how states choose electors in the Electoral College. Election officials allegedly violated that clause by altering election procedures in violation of state law (enacted by the legislatures), ostensibly in order to help people vote during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic.
美国宪法中的选举人条款规定，只有州立法机关才能指导各州在选举团中如何选择选举人，据称，选举官员违反了该条款，违反了该州法律（由立法机关制定），改变了选举程序，表面上是为了帮助武汉冠状病毒大流行期间人们投票。
State elections officials also treated some voters more favorably in more Democratic-leaning areas of states, helped in that effort by the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), 同位语an organization 定语从句that directed funds to election officials in such areas.
在技术和公民生活中心（CTCL）的努力下，州选举官员还在较为偏爱民主的州内更有利地对待了一些选票。该组织将资金用于此类地区的选举官员。
Finally, while many election officials relaxed voting standards in order to help voters worried about COVID-19状语从句, those relaxed standards made potential fraud more likely.
最终，尽管许多选举官员放宽了投票标准以帮助担心COVID-19的选票，但这些放宽的标准使潜在的欺诈可能性更大。
“All these flaws – even the violations of state election law – violate one or more of the federal requirements for elections (i.e., equal protection, due process, and the Electors Clause) and thus arise under federal law,” Paxton’s brief argues, citing Bush v. Gore (2000).
“所有这些缺陷，甚至包括违反州选举法的行为，都违反了联邦对选举的一项或多项要求（即，平等保护，正当程序和选举人条款），因此，根据联邦法律这些也是缺陷，”帕克斯顿的摘要援引布什诉戈尔案（2000年）指出。。
In other words, these serious violations of federal law make state election matters an issue for the Supreme Court. The Texas brief argues 宾语从句that “a ruling on the 2020 election would preserve the Constitution and help prevent irregularities in future elections.”
换句话说，这些严重违反联邦法律的行为使州选举成为最高法院的一个问题。得克萨斯州的简报认为：“关于2020年选举的裁决将保护宪法，并有助于防止未来选举中的违规行为。”
Texas “respectfully submits 宾语从句that the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging-chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.”
得克萨斯州“谨致敬意地认为，有关选举违规行为的类型在偏离州和联邦法律的程度上超过了2000年大选的选票缺陷事件。”
Importantly, Paxton claims 宾语从句that “these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future elections.”
重要的是，帕克斯顿声称：“这些缺陷累计使人们无法知道谁合法赢得了2020年大选，并威胁到所有未来的选举。”
The Texas brief claims宾语从句 that election flaws “affect an outcome-determinative numbers of popular votes in a group of States that cast outcome-determinative numbers of electoral votes.”
得克萨斯州的摘要声称，选举缺陷“会影响在决定结果的选举人票数的一组州中，决定结果的民众投票数”。
“This Court should grant leave to file the complaint and, ultimately, enjoin the use of unlawful election results without review and ratification by the Defendant States’ legislatures and remand to the Defendant States’ respective legislatures to appoint Presidential Electors in a manner consistent with the Electors Clause,” the Texas brief urges.
得克萨斯州简短敦促，“本法院应准许提起申诉，并最终禁止未经被告州立法机关审查和批准而使用非法选举结果，并由被告州分别立法机关以与选举人大法官一致的方式依照选举人条款任命总统选举人。
Such a Supreme Court order would fall in line with the legislative strategy 定语从句President Donald Trump’s attorneys Jenna Ellis and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have supported.
这样的最高法院命令将与唐纳德·特朗普总统的律师詹娜·埃利斯和前纽约市市长鲁迪·朱利安尼所支持的立法策略相符。
On Monday, Ellis outlined the strategy, 分词predicting that state legislatures in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan will independently investigate the election results and flip the electors from Joe Biden to Trump.
周一，埃利斯（Ellis）概述了该策略，并预测亚利桑那州，乔治亚州，宾夕法尼亚州和密歇根州的州议会将独立调查选举结果，并将选民从乔·拜登（Joe Biden）转到特朗普。
Republicans hold an edge over Democrats in each of the states mentioned. Ellis mentioned Arizona (11 electoral votes), 定语从句where Republicans control the House (31 seats to 29 seats) and the Senate (17 seats to 13 seats). Both Ellis and Paxton noted Georgia (16 electoral votes), 定语从句where Republicans control the House (103 seats to 75 seats) and the Senate (35 seats to 21 seats); Pennsylvania (20 electoral votes), where Republicans control the House (113 seats to 90 seats) and the Senate (28 seats to 21 seats); and Michigan (16 electoral votes), where Republicans control the House (58 seats to 52 seats) and the Senate (22 seats to 16 seats). Paxton mentioned Wisconsin (10 electoral votes), where Republicans control the State Assembly (63 seats to 35 seats) and the Senate (19 seats to 14 seats).
共和党人在上述每个州都比民主党人更具优势，埃利斯提到亚利桑那州（11张选举人票），共和党人控制众议院（31席至29席）和参议院（17席至13席），埃利斯和帕克斯顿都指出。 佐治亚州（16个选举人票），共和党控制众议院（103个席位至75个席位）和参议院（35个席位至21个议席）；宾夕法尼亚州（选举人20个投票票），共和党控制众议院（113个席位至90个席位）， 参议院（28个席位至21个席位）；密歇根州（16个选举人票），共和党控制众议院（58个席位至52个席位）和参议院（22个席位至16个席位）。帕克斯顿提到了威斯康星州（10个选举人票）， 共和党控制州议会（63席至35席）和参议院（19席至14席）。
If the legislatures in states 定语从句Jenna Ellis named flip for Trump, that would represent 63 electoral votes, flipping the election from 306 electoral votes for Biden and 232 for Trump to 295 electoral votes for Trump and 243 for Biden. If the legislatures in states 定语从句Paxton named flip for Trump, that would represent 62 electoral votes, flipping the election from 306 electoral votes for Biden and 232 for Trump to 294 electoral votes for Trump and 244 for Biden.
如果詹纳·埃利斯（Jenna Ellis）州的立法机关为特朗普提名，将代表63选举人票，从而将选举从拜登的306选举人票和特朗普的232选举转变为特朗普的295选举人票和拜登的243选举人票。 投票给特朗普，那将代表62个选举人票，从而将选举从拜登的306个选举人票和特朗普的232个选举人推翻至特朗普的294个选举人票和拜登的244个选举人票。
Ellis rightly praised the Texas brief, 分词citing a key quote. “Our Country stands at an important crossroads. Either the Constitution matters and it must be followed, even when some officials consider it inconvenient or out of date, or it is simply a piece of parchment on display… We ask the Court to choose the former.”
埃利斯正确地赞扬了德克萨斯州的简报，并引述了重要的话：“我们的国家正处在重要的十字路口。要么宪法很重要，就必须遵循它，即使有些官员认为它不便或过时，或者仅仅是其中的一部分。 展示的羊皮纸……我们请法院选择前者。”
While this strategy might be fraught with danger should the state legislatures take it up on their own状语从句, a Supreme Court order would lend important legitimacy to the effort. Furthermore, both Ellis’ strategy and the Paxton brief involve directing the state legislatures to investigate the results before acting, and their investigations would provide the opportunity to convince the American people 宾语从句that this does indeed restore legitimacy to the election.
如果州议会自行采取这项策略，虽然该策略可能充满危险，但最高法院的命令将使这项努力具有重要的合法性。 在采取行动之前，他们的调查将有机会说服美国人民，这确实恢复了选举的合法性。
Even without a Supreme Court order, this Texas brief lays out a powerful case for state legislatures to take action. It will be a high bar to convince the American people 宾语从句that this drastic step is the right one, but Americans are indeed concerned about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election, and rushing forward without this kind of legislative review will likely weaken Americans’ faith in the electoral process.
即使没有最高法院的命令，德克萨斯州的这份简报也为州立法机关采取行动提供了有力的依据。使美国人民深信这一极端措施是正确的一步是有难度的，但美国人确实担心2020年总统大选的结果合法性。 如果不进行此类立法审查而急于前进，将可能削弱美国人对选举进程的信心。
Follow Me 👉🏿
