Ted Cruz: I’ll Argue Pennsylvania Election Fraud Case Before the Supreme Court

National   Steven Ertelt   Dec 7, 2020   |   7:04PM    Washington, DC

Texas Senator Red Cruz says he would present oral arguments a the Supreme Court on behalf of a Pennsylvania congressman and Congressional candidate if their election fraud lawsuit appears in front of the nation’s highest court.

Cruz says he would argue the Pennsylvania election law case in front of SCOTUS for Congressman Mike Kelly and candidate Sean Parnell. They filed a lawsuit two weeks ago to challenge the legality of mail-in ballots and the plaintiffs insist millions of mail-in ballots are not allowed by the state constitution. Now the U.S. Supreme Court has become involved and is requiring state officials to file legal briefs by tomorrow.

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is overseeing that appeal and appears to be interested in taking up the case. Alito moved the deadline from Dec. 9 to Dec. 8 to meet the “safe harbor” deadline.

If the case winds up in front of SCOTUS, Cruz says he will accept their offer to argue the case, who said I “stand ready to present the oral argument”.

“Petitioners’ legal team has asked me whether I would be willing to argue the case before the Supreme Court, if the Court grants certiorari,” a statement to Fox News from Cruz reads. “I have agreed, and told them that, if the Court takes the appeal, I will stand ready to present the oral argument.”

“As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony across the Nation needs resolution,” Cruz also said to Fox News. “I believe the Supreme Court has that responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.”

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.

Here’s more:

But on Sunday, Alito moved up the deadline for Pennsylvania officials to respond to Tuesday by 9 a.m. ET. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the move is significant because it “would give the court a few hours Tuesday to act on Kelly’s request if it chooses to do so.”

The plaintiffs in the case are seeking to have the court toss all of the state’s mail-in ballots on the grounds that a state law passed in October 2019 that allows for no-excuse absentee voting is unconstitutional. The state constitution specifies that absentee votes can be cast for only a limited number of reasons.

Alito reportedly did not offer an explanation for the change, but nevertheless it is certainly a hopeful sign for efforts to challenge the state’s election results. The Inquirer noted that Alito’s original selection of the Dec. 9 deadline indicated to most legal observers that the court had no intention of acting on the case in a way that would alter the results.

Former Vice President Joe Biden currently leads incumbent President Donald Trump in the state by just over 80,000 votes. But should the courts rule that millions of mail-in ballots cast in the state be lost, it would effectively ensure a Pennsylvania victory for Trump as the election would be sent to the state’s Republican-controlled legislature for a vote.

In a unanimous decision late last month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit, essentially arguing that it arrived far too late and only came after the lawmakers’ favored candidate lost.