No, this is not true. When a state files a suit in the supreme court directly (called original jurisdiction), there are two parts: a motion to file for leave and then the bill of complaint. You can't just file the second part without the motion to file for leave.
-
Republicans of the state legislatures in question need to send their own electors to the convention. There is nothing in the constitution that requires a governor to bring the legislature into a special session. They can force a session just by meeting. Pence has full constitutional authority to decide which electors from the state to use, or even to disregard all electors from the state.
-
Texas needs to send 538 electors on Monday. No other state can challenge this based on what the supreme court showed us today.
These PA legislators just need to send their own set of electors. Pence has full authority to choose which electors are counted on 12/14.
No other state would have standing to challenge this, because SCOTUS would have ruled that states can't challenge the electoral process in another state, even if it violates the constitution.
AMICI CURIAE is when lawyers offer their opinion to the judges on how the case should be decided. Amici can be filed by law professors, attorney generals, etc. Here, the other states (attorney generals) signed the Amici document to say they agree with what Texas is saying and think the court should rule in their favor. They aren't added as additional plaintiffs.
You make an interesting point in your last paragraph. I never thought about it that way.
I read 10k, but those 10k aren't reflected in the current PA vote totals.
It's a gray area. On one hand, the 12th amendment gives pence the authority to count the votes, and provides no guidance on what to do in unusual scenarios (obvious fraud, two sets of electors from a single state, etc). So you could take the position that Pence would decide what to do in those scenarios.
On the other hand, congress passed the electoral count act of 1877 to create rules on how electors should be counted. There are also procedural rules created by congress.
Ultimately, the supreme law of the land is the constitution, which is vague about how Pence must act in certain scenarios. Pence could take the position that the electoral count act or congressional rules prevent him from performing his constitutional duties. The question is, who would have legal standing to challenge his actions? Would the court intervene? And would they intervene in time?