NBC provides 53 lawsuits. 13 of which claims election fraud in the article.
ALL STATES
Texas v. Pennsylvania "Denied" Texas filed suit against Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and Wisconsin on the grounds that fraud and mistakes damaged the presidential election in those states.
[Lack of standing] "The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot."
Denied: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html
PENNSYLVANIA
Pirkle v. Wolf "Withdrawn" Lawsuit filed by voters in Pennsylvania claiming election officials included illegal Presidential Elector results. The challenge seeks to stop the certification of presidential election results from certain counties.
[Withdrawn voluntarily] The law firm Porter Wright that represented the voters who filed the lawsuit withdrew from the case, A lawyer Jones Day from that firm said that they did not want to get involved in additional litigations in this election. The voters who filed withdrew the filing.
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-2088_Complaint.pdf
Metcalfe v. Wolf "Denied" Lawsuit filed by Republican state representatives and two Republican voters seeking to decertify the 2020 general election results in Pennsylvania.
[Deadline reached] "Thus, the deadline for filing a Class II contest of the November 3, 2020, General Election was November 23, 2020. Plaintiffs filed their complain on December 4, 2020, which was 11 days after the statutory deadline"
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Complaint-Filed.pdf
Denied: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Memorandum-Opinion-Filed.pdf
MICHIGAN
Bally v. Whitmer Lawsuit filed by voters in Michigan the challenge seeks to exclude presidential-election results from the named Wayne, Washtenaw, and Ingham counties. Claiming there exists sufficient evidence to place in doubt the November 3 presidential election, In identified key counties, issues with transparency, fraudulent changing of dates, software glitches, clerical errors, illegal votes and other issues related to irregularities.
[Withdrawn Voluntarily] The decision to withdraw the case comes after Wayne County Circuit Chief Judge Timothy Kenny denied a request last Friday for an independent audit of the votes cast by Wayne County voters.
King vs. Whitmer "Denied" Lawsuit filed by Republicans seeking to de-certify Michigan’s election results based on voter fraud.
[Deadline reached] Judges say "the ship has sailed" a long time ago and that it's too late to contest the result.
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/01.pdf
WiSCONSIN
Langenhorst v. Pecore "Withdrawn" The case filed in federal court in Green Bay seeking to throw out illegal votes in Milwaukee, Dane, and Menominee Counties [Voluntarily Withdrawn] On November 16, 2020, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit. Just 45 minutes before a scheduled evidentiary hearing with the Court
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/ED-WI-Lawsuit.pdf
Feehan v. Wisconsin "Denied" The suit brings light to massive election fraud, dominion voting systems fraud,multiple violations of the Wisconsin Election Code, in addition to the Election and Electors Clauses and Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution seeking to decertify the 2020 general election results in Wisconsin.
[Lack of Standing] U.S. District Judge Pamela Pepper dismissed the case in an order issued late Wednesday evening, ruling that she lacked standing under the U.S. Constitution to overturn a state election.
ARIZONA
Trump v. Hobbs "Dismissed" This case was brought forward November 7, Regarding Republican voters being encouraged to use "Sharpie Pens" which would invalidate the ballot when counted through the machine.
[Lack of Standing] A motion was sent to the court to dismiss the case. Main argument: Plaintiffs lack standing to bring their claims. https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/TrumpvHobbs-MotiontoDismiss-As-Filed.pdf
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/CV2020-014248-Complaint.pdf
Bowyer v. Ducey "Denied" The suit brings light to massive election fraud, of the Election and Electors Clauses, and the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, of the U.S. Constitution and multiple violations of the Arizona election laws.
[Lack of standing] (Similar to Feehan v. Wisconsin) The plaintiffs filed an appeal regarding the lawsuit lacked legal standing, The judges agreed and ruled on that argument “To ensure that the Federal Judiciary respects the proper—and properly limited— role of the courts in a democratic society, a plaintiff may not invoke federal-court jurisdiction unless he can show a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.”
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Bower-Complaint-AZ.pdf
Denied: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Order-Granting-MTD.pdf
Stevenson v. Ducey "Withdrawn" This suit was filed by Arizona Election Integrity Association, alleging that a grant from the Center for Tech and Civic Life helped fund the election, that the absentee ballot error rate was impermissibly high, and that state officials did not enforce residency requirements and permitted double voting. Based on these purported violations of the Election Code and the state constitution, plaintiffs seek an injunction against the certification of the election results. [Voluntarily Withdrawn] https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/PetitionforElectionContest.pdf
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/PetitionersNoticeofVolunta.pdf
Burk v. Ducey the plaintiffs lawsuits regard illegal ballots that were counted in the vote totals, Dominion voting machines fraud. [Active]
Lawsuit: https://casetext.com/case/burk-v-ducey
GEORGIA
Pearson v. Kemp
This lawsuit brings to light a massive election fraud, multiple violations of Georgia laws and multiple Constitutional violations, as shown by fact witnesses to specific incidents, multiple expert witnesses and the sheer mathematical impossibilities found in the Georgia 2020 General Election. [Active] Dismissed but appealed (still ongoing).
Lawsuit: https://casetext.com/case/pearson-v-kemp-1
Wood v. Raffensberger "Denied" This lawsuit claims thousands of illegal votes were counted and that extreme biased funding contributed by Mark Zuckerberg tainted the election.
[Lack of legal standing] On November 19, Judge Steven Grimberg ruled that Wood lacked legal standing to bring the case, had brought it too late. The judge stated that Wood also failed to show that he had been harmed.
Trump v. Raffensperger This lawsuit claims more than 20,000 ballots were cast by non-residents and that counties did not properly screen mail ballot signatures. The complaint seeks an audit or, if none is granted, decertification of the election results. Status: Denied.
The filing was initially rejected due to the plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee and complete the prerequisite paperwork, but was corrected later that day. Trump, joined by Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court of Georgia on December 11, asking it to hear the case within the next three days (i.e. before the Electoral College voted) the next day, the Court unanimously declined to hear the case, with Justice Harold Melton finding that "petitioners have not shown that this is one of those extremely rare cases that would invoke our original jurisdiction"
Lawsuit: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Trump-v.-Raffensperger.pdf
SUMMARY
5 "Lack of Standing" (You have no right to speak pleb, I will not hear your evidence, go away)
2 "Deadline Reached" (You should've filed before the election when it was impossible for you to file)
4 "Withdrawn voluntarily" (Most reasons: suits were similiar, 1 case a lawfirm backed down because they got threatened)
2 "Still active"
This means that all the election fraud evidence has not been debunked by any judge in any case brought forward in this NBC article in any court whatsoever.
For people who are not familiar with legal terms, lack of standing DOES NOT mean lack of evidence. It means the court won't even begin to look at the evidence because the person filing the suit is deemed not responsible for the case. It (supposedly) did not directly affect them so they should not be the ones to make the lawsuit. You have to "show harm" before you file the suit. In this circumstance, it's kind of hard (impossible) to show harm of election fraud if you're not even allowed to begin to show your evidence of fraud in court.
Exactly. I wish pedes could understand this. They still think it's a matter of proving fraud to people. The problem is not lack of proof; the problem is people so brainwashed that they're glad Biden cheated because they just hate Trump so much.