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
The Congressional Hopeful Trying to Turn Texas "Blue"
Laura Moser, who's running for the House seat in Texas's 7th district, told Cheddar the vast majority of Americans already hold Democratic values. She argues that the party loses elections by trying to "act too Republican."
The Politically Charged 60th Annual Grammy Awards
Brande Victorian, Managing Editor of MadameNoire, discusses the 60th Annual Grammy Awards. R&B star Bruno Mars took home six awards including Album of the Year, upsetting frontrunners Kendrick Lamar and Jay-Z.
A GOP Divided
Matthew Chapman, National Political Writer at Shareblue, discusses the divide in the GOP between Trump loyalists and Republican senators like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) or Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) who are trying to reign in the president.
Between Bells: January 26, 2018
On Your Future Home: Housing trends and tips with Quicken Loans. On Between Bells: Trump's Davos speech and Baked by Melissa's cupcake empire. With GameSpot, Citi, and Conservative Review.
Democrats Grow Wary of Tech Giants
Once seen by politicians as a tool to tackle issues, Capitol Hill is finding out that technology could be a double-edged sword with unintended consequences. Cecilia Kang, National Technology Correspondent at The New York Times, joined to take a closer look at the crossroads between politics and Silicon Valley.
Closing Bell: January 26, 2018
Bitcoin still trading far from its all-time high around $20,000. Coincheck confirmed it suffered what appears to be the biggest hack in cryptocurrency. Samsung Galaxy S9 looking to rival the iPhone X camera. President Trump reportedly ordered the firing of Robert Mueller over the summer but reversed course after the special counsel threatened to resign.
Inside the Legal Ramifications of Trump's Attempt to Fire Mueller
President Trump reportedly ordered the firing of Robert Mueller over the summer but reversed course after the White House special counsel threatened to resign. That's according to a recent report in the New York Times. Fordham University Law Professor Jed Shugerman explains the potential legal ramifications of these revelations.
Opening Bell: January 26, 2018
U.S. computer giant Dell is reportedly considering a major shake-up, which could include an acquisition or an IPO. Bill Ackman's Pershing Square Capital is betting big on Nike. President Trump delivers a speech in Davos, but will it be overshadowed by reports that Trump wanted to fire special counsel Robert Mueller last summer? Plus, celebrity divorce lawyer Laura Wasser talks about her new app "It's Over Easy," which aims to make divorce quicker and easier.
Load More