Huh. I was unaware of that. Though it's definitely possible for two parties in a lawsuit to both be in the wrong, and for the court to rule as such. Such as a violation of contract but where both parties violated the contract, so the court rules it null and void, or provides some other legal remedy.
It's also possible that you could argue that minor changes, like moving a date, aren't substantial enough to need legislative approval. Versus what these other states did with signature verification that basically changed the entire process.
The entire lawsuit doesn't hinge on Article II, though, there's also the Equal Protection violation and the evidence of voter fraud/impropriety. There's at least three things that need to be ruled on.
My worries are that the Supreme Court will say, "Well, technically the legislature didn't make these changes, but a state official does so that still counts as the 'legislature.'"
But that doesn't change the other two things I mentioned.
My worries are that the Supreme Court will say, "Well, technically the legislature didn't make these changes, but a state official does so that still counts as the 'legislature.'"
Yeah this is kind of the angle I was driving toward, because if it can be shown that enough states did this, they can probably make some kind of argument that "clearly this is considered standard operating procedure done without objection from state legislatures nationally, even among the states bringing this case, therefore there's not really any problem", or something like that.
The biggest concern I have about it is that while you're right it's not the only thing the case rests on, an article 2 complaint is by far the clearest in terms of giving Texas standing. If they lose that as a line of attack, the others might not be enough to give it to them (e.g. it's not clear that a state actually has standing to sue another state because voters in that state committed fraud)
I guess we'll see. I have to say though, regardless, it does cast the case in a rather weird light after I learned about that. (2 of the cosigning states even made changes to accept mail in ballots after election day in this fashion...very strange position all around)
Huh. I was unaware of that. Though it's definitely possible for two parties in a lawsuit to both be in the wrong, and for the court to rule as such. Such as a violation of contract but where both parties violated the contract, so the court rules it null and void, or provides some other legal remedy.
It's also possible that you could argue that minor changes, like moving a date, aren't substantial enough to need legislative approval. Versus what these other states did with signature verification that basically changed the entire process.
The entire lawsuit doesn't hinge on Article II, though, there's also the Equal Protection violation and the evidence of voter fraud/impropriety. There's at least three things that need to be ruled on.
My worries are that the Supreme Court will say, "Well, technically the legislature didn't make these changes, but a state official does so that still counts as the 'legislature.'"
But that doesn't change the other two things I mentioned.
Dan Bonginos podcast today talked about this today...
Yeah this is kind of the angle I was driving toward, because if it can be shown that enough states did this, they can probably make some kind of argument that "clearly this is considered standard operating procedure done without objection from state legislatures nationally, even among the states bringing this case, therefore there's not really any problem", or something like that.
The biggest concern I have about it is that while you're right it's not the only thing the case rests on, an article 2 complaint is by far the clearest in terms of giving Texas standing. If they lose that as a line of attack, the others might not be enough to give it to them (e.g. it's not clear that a state actually has standing to sue another state because voters in that state committed fraud)
I guess we'll see. I have to say though, regardless, it does cast the case in a rather weird light after I learned about that. (2 of the cosigning states even made changes to accept mail in ballots after election day in this fashion...very strange position all around)