I might be confusing the nature of the case, but one of the things I though they were going to argue in this case, was that PA changed the election law unconstitutionally (only state legislature can do that). GA had a similar situation and so did MI, I think.
A county clerk in a dem stronghold in WI changed the rules on ID requirements. According to the US Constitution only the state legislature had authority to do that and it created unequal treatment of ballots among different counties. There's more I'm sure, but that's off the top of my head.
My understanding of the strategy, is that if we win in PA, it will create legal precedent that can be used in other states....GA, MI, WI.
I might be confusing the nature of the case, but one of the things I though they were going to argue in this case, was that PA changed the election law unconstitutionally (only state legislature can do that). GA had a similar situation and so did MI, I think.
A county clerk in a dem stronghold in WI changed the rules on ID requirements. According to the US Constitution only the state legislature had authority to do that and it created unequal treatment of ballots among different counties. There's more I'm sure, but that's off the top of my head.