Keystone Today

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro filed a response to the lawsuit Texas filed against Pennsylvania and other states challenging their votes.

“NEW: We've responded in TX vs. PA, GA, MI, WI,” Shapiro tweeted. “Texas has not suffered harm because it dislikes the result of the election. Nothing in the Constitution supports Texas' view that it can dictate how four other states run their elections.” 

Shapiro urges the court to deny the motion, and asks for a temporary restraining order, or an administrative stay.

“Since Election Day, State and Federal courts throughout the country have been flooded with frivolous lawsuits aimed at disenfranchising large swaths of voters and undermining the legitimacy of the election,” Shapiro wrote. “The State of Texas has now added its voice to the cacophony of bogus claims. Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states for yielding results with which it disagrees.”

Shapiro argues that Texas’ request for the court to name Texas’ preferred candidate as president is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy.

Shapiro called Texas’ requests baseless and says they should be rejected.

“It attempts to exploit this Court’s sparingly used original jurisdiction to relitigate those matters,” Shapiro wrote. “But Texas obviously lacks standing to bring such claims, which, in any event, are barred by laches, and are moot, meritless, and dangerous.”

Shapiro says that Texas hasn’t been harmed by the election’s results or how other states choose to run their own elections.

“Texas’s effort to get this Court to pick the next President has no basis in law or fact,” Shapiro wrote. “The Court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated.”

Shapiro says Texas’ view would harm the constitution.

Texas filed a suit with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the votes in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. The lawsuit argues that the states treated certain voters differently than others and there were multiple voting irregularities in each state. 

Texas argues the states violated the electors clause, due process and equal protection.