Breaking: Texas Sues PA, GA, MI, & WI at Supreme Court

Breaking news the state of Texas sues battleground states, the US Supreme Court determined the outcome of the Presidential election will talk about that today on Jay Sekulow live live in Washington DC. Phone lines are open for your questions right now: 1-800-684-3110 one 800-6841 10 and now your host secular. I got my hands for those you want your Facebook on YouTube. It is filed by the state of Texas and their Atty. Gen., the state of Texas versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the state of Georgia state of Michigan and the state of Wisconsin this lawsuit again at the filing at the US Supreme Court focuses it on really three made counts electors because being violated because the electors clause says that it state legislators, the legislatures that have to make rules on the elections and changes to the election rules.

There's a equal protection claim as well as a due process claim, and it closes with save the prayer for relief is to declare that these states cannot set the current electors that that basically that the legislature passed to each of the states appoint new electors.

So this is been filed at the US Supreme Court this morning by the state of Texas against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin. What is key outcome determinative because if the Supreme Court were to agree with Texas it could ultimately be outcome determinative. If the state legislatures had to pick new electors what what is at stake here and this is why I think of all the case. This is the most significant case to be clear, I mean there's no doubt about this is the most significant of the cases filed and is the most significant because it is just that completely outcome determinative. What is that mean it means that if the court were to rule in favor of Texas. Those four states. The states named in the complaint would in fact have their state legislatures determine the outcome. They they would pick the electors. This is a good lawsuit course against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and it is original jurisdiction which means it doesn't start at the District Court level. It starts at the Supreme Court of the United States, where it was lodged yesterday evening very very late actually by the time was like probably this morning.

It was lodged.

It's a very significant piece of religious legislation. Of all the cases all over the country in my mind ending. This is the one there's no doubt about a J because this case now invokes the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which means states can sue states for violations of law are claims that they have in the Supreme Court of the United States, the Supreme Court does not have to accept the case is discretionary depends on what four justices decide to do, but there is no more important case pending that has been filed all over the country than this case now pending before the Supreme Court of the United States. It's interesting because it raises the equal protection it raises the usual, I was at the significant constitutional issues absolutely including article on to section 1. Basically, the state is entitled to select electors pursuant to statutory rules set by the state legislature and in all of these states we have elections that are at variance with their own statutory rules. That's number one. But number two in Pennsylvania, in particular, the Secretary of State made an affirmative representation to the United States Supreme Court suggesting that ballots would be segregated that were challenged, she failed to comply. If so, this is again very significant because this comes on the day that electors are are being seated and then next week of the 14th they will vote.

So this all has to happen very quickly but this is extremely significant because the state of Texas has the jurisdiction to go right to the US Supreme Court's part of the original jurisdiction of article 3 of the US in the Constitution against finally gets the states because it is again.

It's a problem for the due process and equal protection of the citizens in the state of Texas. So that's why they were the violation is we will answer your question about this. We are better off in the state library breaks a ready audience obviously avoid the commercial of your own things Facebook, YouTube or any other social media platform.

The American Center for Law and Justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. Uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy in fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress. ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support for that. We are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help me way for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge for every dollar you donate $10 gift becomes 20 oh $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do. Simply would not occur without your generous take part in our matching challenge today make a difference in the protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice. Is there any hope for that culture to survive.

And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like it will show you how you are personally pro-life support and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/you event this new Supreme Court case filed by the state of Texas against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the state of Georgia. The state of Michigan in the state of Wisconsin filed by the Atty. Gen. Texas kid Paxton and in this really it's it's three major issues of what is that the electors clause is been violated because the ledger state legislators didn't make these rule changes the way they are supposed to under the Constitution that due process claims equal protection's life. We have good question came and they said American patriot on YouTube super chats. It so what happens when what state refuses the elections electoral votes in Texas is getting out ahead of that that that's exactly like this is blessed that you it's not that were rejecting your electoral votes as it should be going about placing your electors selecting your electors a different way because your elections were too tainted.

Yes, Lily read right from the actual complaint.

See when you start these cases with original jurisdiction. So it's at the Supreme Court is not going to the lower courts it's at the Supreme Court, usually lawful elections are the heart of our constitutional democracy, the public, and indeed the candidates themselves have a compelling interest in ensuring that the selection of a President, any President is legitimate. If that trust is lost, the American experiment will founder a dark cloud hangs over the 2020 Presidential election. Our country stands an important crossroads.

Either the Constitution matters and must be followed a movie that again either the Constitution matters and must be followed even when some officials consider inconvenient or out of date or is simply a piece of parchment on the display of the national archives. We asked the court to choose the former. So here's what you have. You have a preemptive in a sense I think doing that was a it's a very accurate way of saying it of getting ahead of what is a mess because you got litigation going on in these four states right now and Andy this puts the case squarely at our team to monitor the Supreme Court website because we could see a order in this any minute now. The order would probably be for additional briefing if they were interested in the case, I would think so, yes Supreme Court is a been seated while there was a positive and seated at noon Eastern time today, December 8, yet they don't vote until the 14th grant to the safe harbors and what they call the safe harbor of significant you see this. This is very significant is a litigation is been filed by Texas against Pennsylvania and these other jurisdictions is an extremely important case because what it says is this remembrance being brought on behalf of the citizens of Texas against the citizens of other jurisdictions of other states in it saying the way you went about choosing your electors violated the Constitution of the United States and that you did not allow your legislature's to have their laws followed in the implementation of the election and the selection of those people who are of the electors who elect the President of the United States.

Remember, the United States will have a popular vote of the President. We vote for electors, who in turn vote for the President on December 14. It will be this year and what this this saying is you violated equal protection of the law in the way you conducted you states who are defendants in the way you conducted your elections, you diluted the electoral votes of the Texas people and you therefore violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution. This is a critical case I want to say something didn't really I applaud Ken Paxton, the Atty. Gen. of Texas who have the incredible courage to his conviction to find the way to challenge these other states who didn't do it.

Who wouldn't do it the right way. Who would not convene their legislatures, the Ken Paxton is a standup guy did the right thing. He's gonna take a lot of flak for it, I'm sure, but he did the right thing Jay and what he did in filing this lawsuit. Look Ken Paxton is a patriot and you're right he's going to get ill get black because that's the way the media is, but he did the right thing that I think what he sees is a quote from John Adams. Harry I thought was very interesting in the beginning of the in the beginning of the brief. It says that form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the law is the best of republics and that's really what you're talking about here.

This was this was this election is been a mess, absolutely, and we have a clear factual record and we can start. I think with Wayne County, Michigan, because in Wayne County, Michigan, for instance, we have 173,000 votes, which cannot be tied to registered voters. That's number one. Number two, the secretary of the state of Michigan. Jocelyn Benson, a former colleague of mine blatantly violated Michigan law by flooding the state with absentee ballots to the tune of millions that is contrary directly contrary to Michigan statutory law, so attorney general Paxton of Texas is on firm legal ground in deciding factual irregularities in Michigan and Wisconsin in Pennsylvania and in Georgia.

I think this has been an incredible mass and for those of you who are out there who are statisticians and love statistics.

There was based on the early voting patterns in those four states less than a one and a quadrillion. Pop possibility that Joe Biden could overtake Pres. Trump and and it's even worse when you think about it in terms of all floor states collectively and so it's a statistically impossible for Joe Biden to prevail, that is certainly what is alleged here to get a question carried on YouTube for an and I think this is important to because that's Pennsylvania case return by Estee Heather around and she added $35 start to get this question moved up to the top.

I just I got is even able to please tell me is as Pennsylvania responded to Scotus by the night in bed like they did respond yes and we got Nate will do we have the response from the other in the Mike Kelly case. I have the response printed out videos can bring into the bar during the break we will have an analogical head have responded yet they have responded which at well that if they didn't respond. That would've been a mess for them so they responded will see is anything else on the Supreme Court ordered work Vermont function watching live TV and radio were our teams are looking at the Supreme Court docket to determine what action has or has not been taken to look like there's been nothing filed yet to work it and probably some this afternoon filed by this record at his mudflap management.

Pennsylvania has probably never filed by the Supreme Court yet. What is this all made. This means we have an outcome determinative case of the Supreme Court of United States and fan as you said, we have a Congress that's ready if they have to wear lease is getting ready yet.

George talked about this a number of times over the last few weeks. This is the case, that is outcome determinative.

For this reason.

Indeed, the electoral votes. As you probably have seen and reported on the mainstream media are 306 for Joe Biden, and 232 for Donald Trump but J the electoral votes represented in the four states that were talking about today. Total 62 so there's a couple different scenarios that can play out one if the Supreme Court would rule for Texas. Those 62 electoral votes could be discarded altogether. That would bring Joe Biden down to a total of 244 or it. If the state legislatures would then set another set of electors and those would go towards Donald Trump that would actually put him over the top to 294 Vijay on the disco finish the answer to the question you ask about if it ends up in Congress. If those electoral votes are just invalidated. What does that mean. It means that neither candidate gets to 270 and, ultimately, would be the House of Representatives by a vote of state delegations which there are more Republican delegations than Democrat delegations that would choose the President and it would be the United States Senate by vote that would choose the vice President United States. That's how this could end up in Congress.

If the electoral votes from these four states were to be invalidated and not replaced by a separate slate of electors. That said, how many more Republican delegations are there the house and that it the Democrat because it doesn't have to do with the fact the Democrats have more seats in the house.

It's bistate so how many more is it yet. Looks like there is to be 27 delegations controlled by Republicans, Jordan, and I believe the number is only 22 for Democrats with one delegation tied. There are still a couple of races out so that's it does. Those numbers actually aren't firm yet.

Jordan okay, I do believe Republicans are can control at least 27 delegations in the house right there you go on. He said that that gives those two examples where this case go.

If it was when all the way. The Supreme Court agreed with Texas. The two different remedies. What is that no one got to 270, so goes to the house Republicans lead that and that they would vote in that I think they would support present Trump because they got the Republican majority in the course of the Senate. They pick the vice President. If this is to occur.

Pits now. The other option is that that you just re-asked that the state legislatures reassess they put into electors and those do electors put in trouble electors and he gets to 294, which is well over 270 and he's got the electoral college. When this is all I get say what if this case moves past the stage and ultimately the Supreme Court agrees with the state of Texas. I think it's important for you to understand this single case is outcome determinative.

It is outcome determinative. This is the one we said there is only one you're looking at it by folks who want to support the work of the ACLJ when a matching challenge Tempe ACLJ.org going to be the detailed stay with us during the break in Facebook periscope due to wherever you're watching share with your friends. More information coming in were gimmicky during the break ready audience. Go to your devoted merger might become back with us born that's right folks, a matching challenge. She double the impact your donation is we are the month of December and of course you realize how busy we are at the ACLJ it's a great time to support the work that we do. It's how we bring you this broadcast every day. Donate today and double your impact be part of our matching challenge@aclj.org ACLJ.org only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold edition like it will show you how you are personally pro-life support and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ only cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right question for copy mission life today online ACLJ/the American Center for Law and Justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. Uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support for that. We are grateful.

Now there's an opportunity for you to help me way for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge for every dollar you donate $10 gift becomes 20 oh $50 gift becomes 100.

This is a critical time for the ACLJ the work we do. Simply would not occur without your generous take part in our matching challenge make a difference in the protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online ACLJ Jay Sekulow live so again we got a lot of people with phone calls questions but I do want to discuss its issues to issues at play here right now that we are waiting on the Supreme Court, Pennsylvania did respond. They responded through really was the Biden campaign stop attorney and and so he he kind of is written. This brief Barry Burke. They responded and submitted significant response. By the way, I would say I would say if you look at a that we say three divisive layouts. Explain to people the application talk about cars like hell yesterday at that's exactly specific to Pennsylvania this case, only the case, that's Capt. Mike Kelly, US Congressman versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is a case that deals specifically specifically with what happened in Pennsylvania where they changed the rules, the laws by administrative action when the Constitution requires legislative action on this. It was serious enough that some of the justices asked even though they said it was, not timely. Would were concerned about the merits, it's in the marriage. The decision to dismiss that now. That case was sent to the Supreme Court yesterday. You remember we reported that Justice Alito moved up the timing of the response. Originally Pennsylvania was to respond tomorrow that they had respond today. They have not responded. So Pennsylvania's case now is joined at the Supreme Court of the United States. That means the brief for the petitioner applicant has been filed in this case presents emergency request for injunctive relief, as well as the respondent, so in the Pennsylvania case issue has been joined in the case involving the state of Texas versus Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin. They bill of complaint. The injunction the briefs in support have been filed by the state of Texas and again Ken Paxton did a fantastic job so the steam I want to thank all of them did a really great job on this that has been filed, there has not been a order yet as to when they respond when they don't respond rather than respond and this also has a request for an injunction wide injunction and injunction because don't you don't want have a situation where electors are actually casting the ballot that does not happen until 14 December, so the court in Bush versus Gore had argument on the brief were finished up around the 10th or 11th argument was done on the 12th decision came out on the 13th and thereby may be a day off and then then the electors met disk this if accepted, and they have jurisdiction of its original jurisdiction when original jurisdiction means is that it's not a situation where I file a petition for certiorari because I got from the District Court to the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.

The case from Texas from my Kelly's case though it went directly to the Supreme Court of the United States and lays out very clearly all of the legal issues that have to be addressed here. It's itchy. We have a similar question from G sound on YouTube super chatty, but also from Julie sending me to contact Julie's call will answer both hey Julie Scott from California online for hey Julie, welcome to Jay Sekulow liability will donate Olympics, I appreciate that well you think understand profile similar lawsuit and the cycle questionnaire and found the skeleton helping and difficult before the Supreme Court limits of the first question first look. I think the way other states will join will depend upon what the court issues the court issues a bleeping work. You can see two things happen you can see other states that are interested in this either intervene because they have the same harm they just file simply emotion and the maligned intervening quickly and again in an intervention simply means me to. I have the same harm I have the same arguments the same thing happened to me the same reasons that are Ken Paxton asserted on behalf of Texas apply to me.

I want to intervene and become a party to this case and the state can do that the Supreme Court would allow them to come in as an intervening state and there are many states that may very well feel the same way as Texas does. And they say that I want intervene and be part of this litigation. The other way of courses they can father owned basically same lawsuit so that there's a way to do that in the court then could join the cases together and there's 1/3 way and it we do a lot of these in Amicus we could be father friend of the court preparing lays out the legal issues for those states absolutely solo with an amicus brief, the states would file in strong support of the argument and the argumentation that I Ken Paxton of Texas has already written, but they may actually add additional friendly arguments as well get an argument specific Jordan, as to them that that that's right.

If they want to or they could just that and it could be more than five Amicus and it can be very similar because this is about = actually process and that you didn't follow the Constitution which is a state legislatures have to do this. These are very low assignment is that that tax additional state had to make the filing they had to do it right now in Texas dated by the time they needed to do it and that was key to have a Atty. Gen. Paxton file this, the state of Texas file this and and because of that you now have this active before the US Supreme Court. I did that before each other because how quickly does the court at the Abbey. They know they have to act quickly without writing habits out.

I'll give you kind of the behind-the-scenes I think is probably happy.

I don't know this was about what happens this came in late last night. It was docketed.

Case number is meant would been signed to will you probably get is occasional if you look online is then distributed to the entire court is actually bound printed like we do our break ship. That's the SABS looking for one, it's exactly the same way you bind them they were printed last night at late at night they go George. That one is at its greatest.

When we happen to be. This one's an amicus brief when Harry was talking about in the case.

We filed in other printed bounding goal. Now that this will be white because it's an application or petition is distributed to the justices and then the be a consensus of what the justices want to do or the Chief Justice himself could put down a if he so desires a briefing schedule same organ to hear this and we want to break it will be but you said how quick and and and the call were saying you know how quick to React. This could be hours, make a similar brief by 5 o'clock today or tomorrow by 9 o'clock. That's what happened in the Pennsylvania case FRC ACLJ Volvo. Don't forget we've already intervened on behalf of the President and another Pennsylvania case in the course that status. We got a stay was granted in that particular case, but election integrity is a big issue for the American Center for Law and Justice because of the constitutional issues were heavily involved in drafting writing that Harry could be putting up a piece I think today or later today or tomorrow on this whole thing acquaintance with the court telling us what they want to do, and if appropriate, we may follow brief. In that case in the text case of appropriate leftist determine what the court actually asked for and whether we think we determine it's beneficial or not. Having said all of that. I think it's important for you to understand that this is been a monumental effort on behalf of your looking at four of the lawyers here that have worked in all of these things I will tell you there are more than the four of us and of course then we have an entire team behind the glass that's making sure we come to you every single day. Why do I say that were going to break now if you're on Facebook or periscope which they live worthy to stay lie right through this if you're on radio to get a commercial break come back to us levitate some folks support the work of the American Center for Law and Justice. If you enjoy this broadcast of you appreciate the work we do here in the eye states around the globe make that donation matching challenge month.

That's right and it's it's how we bring the broadcast to every single day.

The revelry of this broadcast with all these experts in the team whether you're watching with your listing. Your support is how we are do that as well support the work of ACLJ part of our matching challenge.

Donate today ACLJ.or we have a group of donors the entire month of December.

A single batch all the donations the cover group in the month of December. Donate today you support our work, folks, and this is critical work at ACLJ.or will be right back. For those who watching will stay with you as you listing back about a minute.

The American Center for Law and Justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ matching challenge for every dollar you donate, it will be now $10 gift becomes $20, $50 gift becomes 100 you can make a difference in the world who knew protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most to you and your family. Give a gift today online ACLJ.live from Washington DC Jay Sekulow live and now your secular Jay Sekulow this Jordan say Celtic majority first second half hour. I want to reset the stage. Carolyn on YouTube supercharge a great way still Jacob who most of the same time.

Thanks for tracking and updating us in all these issues. Let's set the stage LXXX for what is happened we know about Pennsylvania you talked about this yesterday were waiting there for court action actually right but it Texas.

This new filing. Let's tell people like as if some people who are just joining us right now and for those you bid listing just get through this for second so that people just joining us understand retirement this new case filed with the original jurisdiction at the US Supreme Court did okay the the case that has been filed is a case that when I say original jurisdiction and under the Constitution United States. A state can sue another state or set multiple states going directly to the Supreme Court of the United States does not have to go through lower federal courts does not have to go through that path of certiorari. They have the right to go directly to the Supreme Court, the state of Texas through its very excellent Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton has filed a suit against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin, claiming that the electors in those states were also chosen in unconstitutional means. In other words, that the election processes in each of those states deviated from what the Constitution provides and remember what the Constitution provides is that the legislature sets the mean manner and method of election and what he is saying in this suit on behalf of Texas is that these other states that he is snowing violated the Constitution of the United States by violating their own laws and not following what the legislative mandate of their jurisdictions was and, therefore, that Texas has been harmed in that the other electors that the defendant electors were elected by unconstitutional means Texas follow the law elected their electors by constitutional means and therefore Texas is harmed what he is asking that relief that he is asking. And this is important.

What is he asking the Supreme Court of the United States to do. He's asking number one to declare that the 2020 Presidential election violated the electors clause and the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Other words that that election was unconstitutional in those states, and any electrochemical of the college votes cast by those electors in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin violate the Constitution and should not be counted and therefore if that is the case and those electors are not counted, then neither pose sign either Biden or Trump get the electoral college votes that they need because they both need the letter needs to have 270 to prevail. This matter would be decided by the House of Representatives. So Ken Paxton has filed a comprehensive suit. This is a critical soon folks, this is an important piece of litigation.

Forget all the other suits that skews me that have been filed in other jurisdictions.

For the moment, this is now before the Supreme Court of the United States.

This court will determine one way or another what's going to happen in this election.

Let's go. I say just take certain certain certainties of the phone calls we come back next break. I think that what's important to point out here is that one of the opposite if the electoral college votes are redistributed through new electors by state legislatures. Congress gets involved. And even though the house is controlled by Democrats. They don't control state delegations affect Republicans of 27 looks like Democrats of 21 and two are tied Michigan to Pennsylvania. Those delegations would choose the President is actually right.

During this is even a greater majority so to speak than it was last Congress last Congress.Republicans only control 26 delegations and there was one tie Jordan. Now they're in control 27, and two of them are to be tied so essentially that's a 27 to 21 delegation advantage if it goes to Congress a Pres. Trump would certainly have the advantage sets were the other options if the legislatures can't get their act together to do this are that this Texas lawsuit is seeking support our work@aclj.org. We will be right back for picking your phone calls as well Jay Sekulow life will stay with you for the great American Center for Law and Justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad.

Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. Uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support for that. We are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help me way for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ matching challenge for every dollar you donate $10 gift becomes 20 oh $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ.

The work we simply would not occur without your generous take part in our matching challenge today make a difference in the protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most important to you and your family. You forgive today online ACLJ only one.

A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission life will show you how you are personally and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to the pro-life discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission life today online ACL data/Jay Sekulow starting your phone calls downward monitoring everything to to see what's coming get. It's important to because we got a big audience outgrowing on YouTube that we start the last few weeks. Ed would make sure that you're watching on YouTube. You click that subscribe button so you know your subscribe to the official ACLJ YouTube page. We also click the bell to the right. If you watch if you watch on YouTube. You don't I'm talking about. That will then let you get notifications like the show is going live so you'll know each day we Jay Sekulow live is going live. So I you want to do that. Just like if you're on Facebook a lot abusive like our page on Facebook.

You also get the notifications that are show is going live.

So save those you who watch it on YouTube as well, and I would get right to a phone calls at one 864 30 what to people that hang on the light Jerry in Rhode Island on like to hate Jerry Walker Jay Sekulow live Jerry McClure, really not well, but the only question I have left is what happens to the number 14 and they're going to be ill produced by the "what is this day, or the outcome, turnip Howlett December 14. I think December 14 is a critical date and some lawyers that say that that could even be moved. I and I hear you're not a what what is your thought on that later on, as it is precisely the argument that I can Paxton make sense brief that the Supreme Court has the power because the failure.

For instance, to have a full-blooded hearing, assuming the validity of the factual claims in the legal claims that are made by the state of Texas would mean that we have an illegitimate election. And so, the Supreme Court, this would be extraordinary and I'm not forecasting, but they could in fact delay the December 14 deadline and there is an argument, one might argue in favor of that because the errors that are outlined in this litigation are errors of the defendant states homemaking by virtue of their own unconstitutional action and you cannot forget that. I mean, this is not coming out of the air. This is not some technical violation. There's allegations that there was a violation of the protection clause of due process that violation of the electors clause, a violation of the electrons clause and is a great question coming in, and super chat from Bob on YouTube and says will this report just declared a state electors board or could they do something else and you have a lot of things they could do. They could say goes back to the state legislature can make a determination that would be the most likely outcome.

That's correct.

The Supreme Court of United States disk that combines a winner trumps the winter better than that. And that's not that's not going to happen in this case they got tremendous options that court. First of all, they cannot take the case as Jordan pointed out it's discretionary they can say I'm sorry were not interested in this litigation, and then it will be a mess and I don't know what's going to happen, but they could do a lot of things they could say that the electors in the states that are being challenged by the state of Texas were illegally selected by their jurisdictions.

Go back and select them again. Legislatures of those states and void that or they could say well there of their void.

We don't have to have a reelection that the House of Representatives make the decision, so there's a lot of things of the Supreme Court could do, but I admit I think that the Constitution trumps the statute and I think that with the that the December 14 yes that's set by three USC one as the date when the electors are supposed to meet in the like, but I don't know the what the cons to what whether the Supreme Court is going to say the Constitution has got to trump that as it said, as can Paxton said the Constitution is sacred. It's not a piece of parchment hanging in the national archives. I take that statement very, very seriously, and the Supreme Court will to. Of course there's two very important runoff elections going on January 5 for Georgia to determine the outcome of who is in control of the United States Senate Frank in Florida on life.

I've had question about that as well.

Hi Frank, welcome to Jay Sekulow live by Frank forgot about Georgette thinking did not show up with the stop forgetting about was the reason why good you can talk and cleaned Galligan out.

Stankus, and I think that's what David produced just said I am not going to humiliate myself by going against a person who's never had a job in his life was a Marxist who is a communist who went to the most liberal of schools who went to the London school of economics never got a degree by the way he attended it, just like I walked through Harvard. Let's say and so sending Sen. produce say I'm not going to be little alliance Selye by dealing with John on soft who is on nothing yet but I will say this though, that also. John also added they did have a previous debate, and it was really really nasty and humorous, making a personal attack and with our personal ad hominem attacks and when you get that you know what you say about him. They would produce the visor don't get and the trough don't do that. Yes, don't get into the mod don't get into the muck. Just run your campaign, I completely understand my predicted that rests with the picnic area, but I need to be, you know that and that's that's the issue there so it's a political calculation that was all that was but yet Kelly Laufer decided she wanted to base you want to bring forward Rev. Warnock so that more people actually saw that Fox's actually cover it will cover the debate and she can watch that nationally. She wanted people to see Warnock so she made a different political calculation about him but they did have that seem to like personal attack. He was were about ideal idea ideology yet something I was nasty about that will because that the obviously people even understand that this local Senate race for Georgia is very much a national race, no doubt about it.

Hundreds of millions of dollars in Emporia and look at just one_I mean it did to me.

Both of these decisions, by Sen. Perdue and Sen. Leffler make a lot of sense because these two races were not the same J essentially Purdue and Awsat were head-to-head. There was one other candidate that took a couple of percentage points that Both under 50% of the Sen. Perdue beat David Awsat the John ossify 2%. I mean I think he thinks that he's in a good position heading to the runoff J there were a slew of candidates in the special election on the other side and nobody got more than the mid 30s percentage. So, I think Sen. Leffler thought. I do need another opportunity to go in debate. I think if I were advising both of those candidates I would've told Sen. Perdue not to debate and I would've told Sen. Leffler to debate.Jordan said it's a tactical decision but look J hundreds of millions of dollars in a porno Georgette. It is absolutely a national election, and unless there's a change in the Presidential outcome. J it will determine control of the Senate as well, as we are waiting some action at the Supreme Court what it takes of the people been on hold of the lines K a North Carolina online.

Three KK welcome to Jay Sekulow live.

Thank you. Anyway, thank you for everything again not questioning early for act or should we be contacting our US senators asked him to get on board with no bra to be leading the charge as five if this comes to the house and also in light of a colored background in earlier. Should we contact character attorney generals and ask them to join the Texas state South Carolina.

I think Atty. Gen. Wilson is already reviewing it so you know I would let him do the review process or near the politics better than I and I get I think this let's see if the Supreme Court takes it. Yes, if the Supreme Court takes again.

I think what you can all get on the phone with your state attorney generals and say hey you need to do something like Texas whether you enjoy the case when you file an amicus brief with the intervene because again eight week we would know that if the court takes the case the of the other question about Congress they had. That is a unique movement happens every every election were, a congressman from the house tries to assert today we can actually choose the electors and they would need to sit a partner. I don't think were at that point yet because we have this case now pending before this record as of this moment right now.

That could change tomorrow, but that is at the you yet were not at that point yet, Jordan, but it has happened before. The House of Representatives has had to decide a Presidential election before. It's not like it's something that comes out of thin air. The Constitution specifically spells out the process and I believe the Congressman Mo Brooks is preparing for that but just for a point of clarity to the caller. I should we get to that point were not there yet, but should we get to that point, the House of Representatives would be able to choose by state delegation from the top three vote getters from electoral votes now only two candidates got electoral votes he be talking about Joe Biden and Donald Trump and in the United States Senate would be picking the vice President based on the top two vote getters for vice President so that would again be Connolly Harris and Mike pence and that's the division of how the house and the Senate would handle that. I certainly if it came to that you would want to contact both the house and the Senate would you just want understand the house would be handling the Presidential election and the Senate would be handling the vice President to pick let me take something else. I just thought of if in fact the court issues a briefing schedule. It is possible that the American Center for Law and Justice can file a brief on behalf of its members and we would have to move very quickly with Epson an email to all of our member saying sign up so we have that and you would literally a number of people muncher would have tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands would be part of history that that's if the Supreme Court grants a briefing schedule don't know that yet complaint build complaint has been filed, but we will see. I think sometime today. All right, don't forget support the work of the ACL change ones like now. That's right ACLJ.org. It's a matching challenge month of December you double the impact of your donation ACLJnet or if you're watching on YouTube right now because we just open that up the last few weeks.

I encourage you right now subscribe to the right there but subscribe to the official ACLJ page, click the bell if you're watching you to go to see what I mean you get the notifications about us when were live to come back alive later today about this report, you will belts of subscribe and click the bell on YouTube.

Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free and powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn Gold mission life will show you how you are personally and publication includes a look at all major ACLJ Jesus were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists. The ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to the pro-life side of the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to question your free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/the American Center for Law and Justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those who are persecuted for their faith. Uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support for that. We are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help me way for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge for every dollar you donate $10 gift becomes 20 $50 gift becomes 100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we simply would not occur without your generous take part in our matching challenge make a difference in the protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most important to you and your family. You forgive today online ACLJ Jay Sekulow live so get our surrogate for the phone calls.

Six of the door production to look. There's possibility that orders could be coming out like the next is because with the sprinkler works in the next 15 minutes 20 minutes could be less so.

Let's have somebody monitoring the Supreme Court's website and were still closed on the air will stay on for a few minutes about will come back if we stay on that means on our site where we on on Facebook you Harris go you to places like that. Of course, you will start radio duty to find us that way to continue the THAT way I would get to some of the photos of you but hold on the line bill in Wyoming on light. Six. A bill welcome to Jay Sekulow live development work that you been doing trying to send in a fair penny that I thanks okay I minute try and make sense of my question. If I could get you Mr. secular to actually reiterate the statement that you sent concerning Dorothy Bush yeah this is where we have the protection of the Constitution, but we should not the fact that we should never have to worry about going to the Supreme Court might get technical selection for the President. Could you go and you know you want fair elections, and elections that are determined to be the night of the lecture.

Shortly thereafter to get account for a few days, you don't is not great that you have to run up to the Supreme Court now twice in moral recycle that be 20 years so basically five cycles that you gone out of the screen for twice. I'm glad the screen porch they resolved and I'm glad our founders had the insight and foresight to understand how we do this that there has to be a remedy here, but you know it's not anybody's pleasure and he that were having a run that Lena takes her heavenly father. The Supreme Court now the idea was that the people elect electors that night if that's with the state decides to do in the electors then choose the President, but the premise is, as John Adams says and is is quoted by Ken Paxton, the Atty. Gen. of Texas that form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the law is the best of republics. In other words, follow the law in your state legislature.

The Constitution of the United States says that the legislatures of the states will set the manner means and method of electing electors today who will choose the President that did not happen according to the law allegations of the lawsuit in Texas. In Pennsylvania, in Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin, and therefore we have to resort to the Supreme Court as the as Jay said thank God that the founders of the Constitution in the Republic and it is a constitutional republic. If we can keep it as Ben Franklin said, had the foresight to create a tribunal the Supreme Court to decide these kinds of things. It is unfortunate that we have to occasionally resort to that entity to distant decide our disputes and can do it through the electoral process by both ultimately will work. I have faith in that right what hundred 64, 31, two, that's 100-6431 10 let's go to art in Florida online five hey Art Walker Jay Sekulow live determine my question is if the Supreme Court ruled in favor of AG Paxton's suit that have a positive impact on the Georgia Senate race in that George would have been found to be acting unconstitutionally and therefore has no impact whatsoever on the Senate race and down ticket races is strictly the President and vice President. That's what they like that or without my election electrical has yet to Georgia when you challenge the electors that electors are for President vice President. They did not about the Senate races or other races under the unfortunate understand why you would imagine that if these claims happened out the lead in Georgia. The reason why the lawsuit is against George's because their state officials, the Republican of of the states this is that the one state that Texas has sued. That is a Republican controlled state and he said that your you're just you. You were just as bad a Georgia Secretary of State governor as they word Pennsylvania is a word Michigan as they were in Wisconsin you handle this. Just as poorly and so I understand the concern, but that this is about the Presidential election you that the the runoffs January 5 will determine the makeup of the U.S. Senate Dino got him another call you but I get real quick question here I'm thinking about if we were to file an amicus brief, the ACLJ, I think it would just focus on think equal protection challenge.

When you think would be let where the electors caught I would like one of the two when it what you think will only think you might focus on blow in, in part because there's a clear and unmistakable constitutional argument is embedded in both of those claims and you would not focus on the factual claim supporting rampant lawlessness writers included in AG Paxton set up. Essentially, it's a complaint is this bill complaint is not a search. Repetition is a bill of complaint all right right, etc. we go back to fuzz 164 3110. This is interesting at Pat New Jersey. This people been asked like does it go to one justice like the Pennsylvania case or what happens in case they say Pat Walker to Jason you live in the in the case had just requested alpaca hymns are.

I think Baker thanked Michael, my question is, who wanted to bring court decide that Robert belonged at the site or did in regarding to get that get a say in whether they think it says allocate or not so unlike the situation were Justice Alito was the circuit justice for the Third Circuit, which included Pennsylvania and could issue the initial administrative state, which he did in our case, and we did and another in this Congress and Kelly's case and that it refers to the court. This is a bill of complaint you would have to have five justices agreed to accept the bill now.

Could Chief Justice Roberts issue an administrative order pending. This of course eat the Chief Justice of the night, not just you just nine states report is the Chief Justice of the United States. So yes he can issue an order, but it would be the deterrent determination as to who is to take the case rests with the nine justices and use it takes five.

This is not like the other cases words for no so this is this is a this is what we take for to grant yes and order grant and five to that is a good question. It's not a petition for certiorari so I am not sure if it's a fork for petition for surf report guidances. It's a rule four. Is there a rule five your I don't know will find that out you'll find that out and again the mail mentality does bill of complaints and election cases urban district 1 that many century we try to get where we don't have time for more because they were in the tri-state a little bit longer for if just to see if or takes any action right rabbit will look at right now is there any orders will okay so I think will come back if we need to cut back yeah any river if you're on YouTube if you subscribe and you click that bell you get a notification if we come back on Facebook. You know the say same thing if you watch on Facebook. If you did follow us there. I ended get notifications you'll know when we come back as well. We got a T watching the access report so that what is key. What is very key is that I don't think they one of the Pennsylvania cases stuffed Nazi selection by later today and this would as well. Every maybe tomorrow latest the latest. I would think, but he will brief you as soon as we know through all the social media tales that we are on support worker ACLJ ACLJ.org that's ACLJ.orgy matching challenge month of December begins a great time to support our work in this broadcast donate today and ACLJ.org I think baby talk to you later at the American Center for law and justice were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ matching challenge for every dollar you donate, it will be managed $10 gift becomes $20, $50 gift becomes 100 you can make a difference in the one who knew protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online ACLJ.