By Maryclaire Dale

President Donald Trump’s legal team suffered yet another defeat in court Friday as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia roundly rejected the campaign's latest effort to challenge the state’s election results.

Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal to the Supreme Court despite the judges' assessment that the “campaign’s claims have no merit.”

“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,” 3rd Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote for the three-judge panel.

The case had been argued last week in a lower court by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who insisted during five hours of oral arguments that the 2020 presidential election had been marred by widespread fraud in Pennsylvania. However, Giuliani failed to offer any tangible proof of that in court.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann had said the campaign's error-filled complaint, “like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together” and denied Giuliani the right to amend it for a second time.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called that decision justified. The three judges on the panel were all appointed by Republican presidents. including Bibas, a former University of Pennsylvania law professor appointed by Trump. Trump’s sister, Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, sat on the court for 20 years, retiring in 2019.

“Voters, not lawyers, choose the president. Ballots, not briefs, decide elections,” Bibas said in the opinion, which also denied the campaign's request to stop the state from certifying its results, a demand he called “breathtaking.”

In fact, Pennsylvania officials had certified their vote count Monday for President-elect Joe Biden, who defeated Trump by more than 80,000 votes in the state. Nationally, Biden and running mate Kamala Harris garnered nearly 80 million votes, a record in U.S. presidential elections.

Trump has said he hopes the Supreme Court will intervene in the race as it did in 2000 when its decision to stop the recount in Florida gave the election to Republican George W. Bush. On Nov. 5, as the vote count continued, Trump posted a tweet saying the “U.S. Supreme Court should decide!”

Ever since, Trump and his surrogates have attacked the election as flawed and filed a flurry of lawsuits to try to block the results in six battleground states. But they’ve found little sympathy from judges, nearly all of whom dismissed their complaints about the security of mail-in ballots, which millions of people used to vote from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trump perhaps hopes a Supreme Court he helped steer toward a conservative 6-3 majority would be more open to his pleas, especially since the high court upheld Pennsylvania’s decision to accept mail-in ballots through Nov. 6 by only a 4-4 vote last month. Since then, Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett has joined the court.

“The activist judicial machinery in Pennsylvania continues to cover up the allegations of massive fraud,” Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis tweeted after Friday's ruling. “On to SCOTUS!”

In the case before Brann, the Trump campaign asked to disenfranchise the state’s 6.8 million voters, or at least the 700,000 who voted by mail in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and other Democratic-leaning areas.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Brann wrote in his scathing ruling on Nov. 21. “That has not happened.”

A separate Republican challenge that reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court this week seeks to stop the state from further certifying any races on the ballot. Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration is fighting that effort, saying it would prevent the state’s legislature and congressional delegation from being seated in the coming weeks.

On Thursday, Trump said the Nov. 3 election was still far from over. Yet he offered the clearest signal to date that he would leave the White House peaceably on Jan. 20 if the Electoral College formalizes Biden’s win.

“Certainly I will. But you know that,” Trump said at the White House, taking questions from reporters for the first time since Election Day.

On Friday, however, he continued to baselessly attack Detroit, Atlanta and other Democratic cities with large Black populations as the source of “massive voter fraud.” And he claimed, without evidence, that a Pennsylvania poll watcher had uncovered computer memory drives that “gave Biden 50,000 votes” apiece.

All 50 states must certify their results before the Electoral College meets on Dec. 14, and any challenge to the results must be resolved by Dec. 8. Biden won both the Electoral College and popular vote by wide margins.

Updated on November 27, 2020, at 2:41 p.m. ET with the latest information.

Share:
More In Politics
Is VP Harris Getting Sidelined?
Vice President Kamala Harris received impressive amount of media coverage in January for making history. However, the media attention waned significantly and some are now even saying she has almost disappeared from public view. Reecie Colbert, founder of BlackWomenViews Media, joined Cheddar Politics to discuss more.
Buzzfeed Scores Win in Mueller Report FOIA Fight
If you thought you heard the last of the Mueller report back in 2019, you'd be wrong. While the bombshell report was the biggest story in Washington for years, much of the report remained redacted. Our friends at BuzzFeed News weren't satisfied, so they sued to have certain passages unredacted. They notched another win when a federal appeals court ordered ten passages from the report to be released. Matt Topic, BuzzFeed's attorney in the case, and Jason Leopold, reporter at BuzzFeed News, join Cheddar Politics to discuss.
Omicron Spotlights Lack of Global Pandemic Preparedness
The U.S. reported its first confirmed case of the omicron variant in California on Wednesday. Scientists and health officials are racing to understand the variant, with the WHO saying it's still too early to determine whether it's more contagious, more deadly or more resistant to vaccines than other variants. Omicron has pushed members of the WHO to commit to start talks over a "gobal pandemic treaty" for future pandemic preparedness. Priti Krishtel, co-founder and co-executive director of the Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge, joins Cheddar Politics to discuss.
Roe v. Wade at Stake After Supreme Court Mississippi Abortion Hearing
Wednesday was not a good day for those who believe in abortion rights in this country as the Supreme Court heard arguments on a Mississippi abortion law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The majority of the court appears poised to roll back abortion rights, and the questions from the conservative justices seemed to indicate the law for nearly 50 years is likely to change. Jessica Mason Pieklo, senior vice president and executive editor of Rewire News Group, joined Cheddar Politics to discuss Wednesday's hearing.
Michael Cohen to Sell His Federal Prison Badge as NFT
Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, has been busy since completing his prison sentence in November. He's getting into the NFT space, selling his federal prison badge and the original manuscript of his book "Disloyal" as NFTs. Cohen joined Cheddar to discuss his latest venture and why he thinks there is still much to be revealed about his case.
Biden Boom, Jussie Guilty & Love, Hate, Ate
Carlo and Baker wrap up the week talking about the Biden economic boom that no one seems to notice, a verdict in the Jussie Smollett case, the first Starbucks union in America and the pleasures of the "dude nod."
New Cannabis Expungement Bill Introduced In Congress
A new bill in Congress shows just how bipartisan cannabis really is. Rep. David Joyce, a Republican from Ohio, teamed up with progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on a cannabis expungement bill. Cheddar cannabis reporter Chloe Aiello spoke with the congressman about the legislation.
Progressives in Congress Back Bill to Institute Four-Day Workweek
The Congressional Progressive Caucus have lined up to support the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act introduced by Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif. 41st District). The representative joined Cheddar to discuss how instituting a four-day workweek in the United States can be beneficial for both employees with the need of a work-life balance and employers looking both to retain talent amid a labor shortage and improve efficiency in their workforces. "We live in a different time than 90 years ago when we established a 40-hour workweek," he said. "We've had a lot of technological changes, the American worker is exponentially more productive than previous generations, so it's time to reexamine Americans and the way in which they relate to work."
Load More