Pence argues that the legal issues raised by Homert and the Arizona Republican Slate should be dealt with in the House and in the Senate (if they need to be dealt with).

The Gohmert trial is the latest attempt by the Republicans to persuade Pence to interfere in the announcement of the victory of President-elect Joe Biden and manipulate the election of President Donald Trump. The memo filed with the Eastern District of Texas does not state whether Pence would consider such a possibility, but there is no public indication that he would.

Prosecutors have submitted an emergency motion to this court, asking a number of important legal questions about how votes are counted for the president, Pence said in a press release. However, plaintiffs’ complaint is not the correct remedy for these issues because plaintiffs subpoenaed the wrong defendant.

Later, Pence adds: (A) contests a complaint against the Vice-President alleging that the Vice-President has a discretionary power in the counting of votes.

The trial falsely claims that the elections were stolen by the Democrats, citing unsubstantiated allegations of fraud that have been repeatedly rejected by federal and state courts. Gohmert and the Republicans argue that the electoral law unconstitutionally binds Pence to state certified results and that Pence has the exclusive power and discretion to count the votes throughout the state.

Fault! The file name is not specified.

According to the Twelfth Amendment, only the retired defendant has the exclusive power and discretion to open and allow the counting of voters in that State and, in the case of competing voter lists or if there is an objection to one of the lists, to determine which voters or none of them should be counted, is stated in the court case.

Pence pointed to the irony of Homert’s argument. Ironically, if it had been adopted by the Court, the position of the representative Homertus would in fact have deprived him, as a member of the assembly under the law on the counting of votes, of the opportunity to object, debate and vote on the counting of votes.

At least 140 Republicans in the House of Representatives are expected to oppose January with six counted votes, Jake Tapper of CNN reported on Thursday. Gohmert said he’d be one of them.

There were no credible reports of voting problems that could have affected the elections, as confirmed by dozens of state and federal courts, governors, state election officials and the Ministries of Homeland Security and Justice.

Both a member of the House of Representatives and a senator must oppose the counting of votes by Congress. Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said Wednesday that he would oppose forcing House and Senate lawmakers to vote on whether the results of Biden’s victory should be approved.

House counsel Doug Brief filed an amicus curiae brief on Thursday and asked the court to dismiss the Homert case, calling it a radical departure from our constitutional procedures and consistent legislative practice.

This Court must reject the appeal and the request for extraordinary and unprecedented measures: a declaration that the law on counting voters is unconstitutional and the issuing of an injunction that would interfere with the procedures for counting votes established by Congress. The plaintiffs have no status, their claims are blocked by difficulties and their legitimate and constitutional claims, according to the mandate, may not be repeated by this Court.

Ultimately, the aim of this process is to involve federal courts in a belated and unfounded attack on lengthy constitutional processes to validate the results of a national presidential election, added the House’s opinion.

The Trump campaign also continues with the race to the Supreme Court, making the same unsubstantiated and unproven accusations of voter fraud. Twice this week, the court moved to nullify Biden’s victory in Wisconsin. Other cases in which the president and his allies are trying to derail Biden’s victories in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Arizona are pending before the court.

Also on Thursday, attorney Alan Kennedy, a resident of Biden and the elected vice president of Colorado, Kamala Harris, asked to join the case against Homert.

Fault! The file name is not specified.

(N) Neither the Constitution nor the Electoral Consensus Act provides a basis for claims by persons who are not duly elected and declared presidential voters to replace duly elected and declared presidential voters simply because those persons were not elected but would like to be elected, causing their preferred candidates to lose their re-election, Kennedy said in court documents. The complainants’ assertions to the contrary are not supported by the text of the cited constitutional provisions or by the law on voter registration and are contrary to the full meaning of the electoral administration.

This story has been updated with additional information.

Jake Tapper and Christine Wilson of CNN contributed to this report.

You May Also Like

Your top questions about Covid-19 and vaccines

A new HPV vaccine, called Covid-19, will be available to girls aged…

Who Knew Lockdowns Would Make It Easier for Introverts to Make Friends?

Photo: Getty Images/Historical Images Who knew blockchain would make it easier for…

Flooding From Ida Kills Dozens of People in Four States

With heavy rains and flooding, a deadly tornado ripped through the small…

Brady boosts Buccaneers local TV ratings; Boston viewers still watch TB12’s games

The addition of quarterback Tom Brady to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers has…