Last Updated on January 4, 2021
In yet another stunning abdication of constitutional responsibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has declined to hear an election lawsuit brought by US Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), siding with a lower court’s ruling.
Last week, US District Judge Jeremy Kernodle ruled that the Gohmert and several other Republican plaintiffs “lacked standing” to bring the suit, thus avoiding the issue all together and never having entertained the complaints held within the lawsuit.
“Standing” has been the go-to excuse for the judiciary at every level – from the District Courts and Appeals Courts to the US Supreme Court – for not interceding in the massive acts of vote fraud and ballot tampering in the 2020 General Election in at least five battleground states.
Standing refers to the the legal right to bring an action, in this case action that would prevent Vice President Mike Pence, in his official capacity as President of the Senate, from potentially confirming Democrat presidential hopeful Biden’s perceived electoral victory.
Kernodle ruled that Gohmert couldn’t show a legally recognizable injury to codify his standing to bring the suit. Although other litigants identified a potential injury the judge ruled that injury could not be linked to Pence.
In their decision – which was left unsigned, the three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Kernodle’s decision to toss the case that sought judicial relief for verifiable claims of massive vote fraud and ballot tampering, along with ballot tabulating irregularities.
Last-ditch lawsuit arguing @Mike_Pence has ‘sole discretion’ to select electors thrown out@replouiegohmert has now filed an appeal with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
READ HERE: https://t.co/3jhMwcsB6Q
— Sara A. Carter (@SaraCarterDC) January 2, 2021
“We need say no more, and we affirm the judgment essentially for the reasons stated by the district court,” the Fifth Circuit Court panel wrote in their ruling. “We express no view on the underlying merits or on what putative party, if any, might have standing.”
Gohmert’s lawsuit argued that the US Constitution mandates protocol for instances when alternate slates of electors are presented to the President of the Senate by the states. The lawsuit contends the Constitution empowers the President of the Senate with the “exclusive authority and sole discretion under the 12th Amendment to determine which slates of electors for a state, or neither, may be counted.”
LOUIE GOHMERT: Today's court ruling "would be that you've got to go to the street and be as violent as Antifa and BLM" pic.twitter.com/kamRYeWGqy
— National File (@NationalFile) January 2, 2021
Republican electors in seven states have advanced alternate slates of electors to the Electoral College for President Trump. This presents two slates of electors for those states, setting up a challenge for the joint session of Congress on January 6, 2021, when it counts the electoral college votes.
Pence’s lawyers, afforded to him through his station by the Justice Department, argued the Vice President was not the proper defendant to the lawsuit.
“These plaintiffs’ suit is not a proper vehicle for addressing those issues because plaintiffs have sued the wrong defendant,” the lawyer wrote. “The Vice President—the only defendant in this case – is ironically the very person whose power they seek to promote. The Senate and the House, not the Vice President, have legal interests that are sufficiently adverse to plaintiffs to ground a case or controversy under Article III.”
Pence, since Friday of last week, has issued a cryptic statement through his Chief of Staff, Marc Short, stating, “The Vice President welcomes the efforts of members of the House and Senate to use the authority they have under the law to raise objections and bring forward evidence before the Congress and the American people on January 6th.”
https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1345515901181947910
Pence’s reluctance to champion his own administration – and the judiciary’s refusal to execute its constitutional duty to the American people, is raising questions of high-level corruption and fueling serious discussions amongst the states and the American people of how to achieve relief from what an overwhelming majority of citizens believe to be a fraudulent election.
