By Nomaan Merchant, Alanna Durkin Richer and Mark Sherman 

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a lawsuit backed by President Donald Trump to overturn Joe Biden’s election victory, ending a desperate attempt to get legal issues rejected by state and federal judges before the nation’s highest court and subvert the will of voters.

The high court's order was a stark repudiation of a legal claim that was widely regarded as dubious, yet embraced by the president, 19 Republican state attorneys general and 126 House Republicans.

Trump had insisted the court would find the “wisdom” and “courage” to adopt his baseless position that the election was the product of widespread fraud and should be overturned. But the nation's highest court emphatically disagreed.

Friday's order marked the second time this week that the court had rebuffed Republican requests that it get involved in the 2020 election outcome and reject the voters' choice, as expressed in an election regarded by both Republican and Democratic officials as free and fair. The justices turned away an appeal from Pennsylvania Republicans on Tuesday.

On Monday, the Electoral College meets to formally elect Biden as the next president.

Trump had called the lawsuit filed by Texas against Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin “the big one” that would end with the Supreme Court undoing Biden’s substantial Electoral College majority and allowing Trump to serve another four years in the White House.

In a brief order, the court said Texas does not have the legal right to sue those states because it “has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections.”

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who have said previously the court does not have the authority to turn away lawsuits between states, said they would have heard Texas' complaint. But they would not have done as Texas wanted — setting aside those four states' 62 electoral votes for Biden — pending resolution of the lawsuit.

Three Trump appointees sit on the high court. In his push to get the most recent of his nominees, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, confirmed quickly, Trump said she would be needed for any post-election lawsuits. Barrett appears to have participated in both cases this week. None of the Trump appointees noted a dissent in either case.

The four states sued by Texas had urged the court to reject the case as meritless. They were backed by another 22 states and the District of Columbia.

Republican support for the lawsuit and its call to throw out millions of votes in four battleground states was rooted in baseless claims of fraud, an extraordinary display of the party’s willingness to countermand the will of voters. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy of California and Minority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana were among those joining to support the action.

“The Court has rightly dismissed out of hand the extreme, unlawful and undemocratic GOP lawsuit to overturn the will of millions of American voters,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday night.

A few Republicans expressed concerns about the case. Many others remained silent even as Trump endlessly repeated claims that he lost a chance at a second term due to widespread fraud.

Sen. Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican who has previously criticized the president, applauded the court's decision.

“Since Election Night, a lot of people have been confusing voters by spinning Kenyan Birther-type, ‘Chavez rigged the election from the grave’ conspiracy theories, but every American who cares about the rule of law should take comfort that the Supreme Court — including all three of President Trump’s picks — closed the book on the nonsense," Sasse said in a statement.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said the court “saw through this seditious abuse of the judicial process."

“While these stunts are legally insignificant, their cost to our country — in misleading the public about a free and fair election and in tearing at our Constitution — is high and we will not tolerate them from our sister states or anyone else,” said Shapiro, a Democrat.

The Texas complaint repeated false, disproven and unsubstantiated accusations about the voting in four states that went for Trump’s Democratic challenger. The high court had never before been asked for such a dramatic remedy.

Two days after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed his suit, Trump jumped into the high court case. Hours later, the president held a meeting at the White House, scheduled before the suit was filed, with a dozen Republican attorneys general, including Paxton and several others who backed the effort.

“If the Supreme Court shows great Wisdom and Courage, the American People will win perhaps the most important case in history, and our Electoral Process will be respected again!” he tweeted Friday afternoon. Trump had spent the week relentlessly tweeting about the Texas case with the hashtag “overturn” and claiming, falsely, that he had won the election but was robbed.

In a statement Friday, Paxton called the Supreme Court's decision “unfortunate."

Still, some of the top state Republican prosecutors who urged the court to get involved acknowledged that the effort was a long shot and sought to distance themselves from Trump’s baseless allegations of fraud.

The case inflamed already high tensions over the election. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey said his office staff received two death threats Thursday after he signed onto the brief supporting the case.

The lawsuit also divided officials in some states.

Montana Attorney General Tim Fox supported Texas’ case, even though he said the suit was “belated” and its chances “are slim at best.” Fox said the case raised “important constitutional questions about the separation of powers and the integrity of mail-in ballots in those defendant states.”

But Gov. Steve Bullock, D-Mont., urged the court to reject the case. He said the fact that Texas is not suing Montana, which Trump won, even though the state similarly used mail-in ballots underscores that “this action is less about election integrity than it is about attempting to overturn the will of the electorate.”

Trump's repetition of election-related falsehoods and conspiracy theories has taken hold among far-right media and much of his base. Many Republican voters in several states won by Biden have demanded that their elected officials find a way to invalidate the president-elect's victories.

The Republican Party of Texas on Friday evening issued a statement raising the far-fetched possibility of secession. “Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution,” said party chairman Allen West, the former Florida congressman.

Even though the court’s action seemed to be the end of the road for Trump’s legal fights about the 2020 election results, the president’s efforts may have a destabilizing effect long after he leaves office. Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, vowed Friday to keep fighting.

“Some litigation may continue, but it will not change election results," said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the Universtiy of California, Irvine. "The delegitimization of the Biden presidency by Trump, and of elections generally, will reverberate for years to come. And that’s a real tragedy.”

Merchant reported from Houston and Richer reported from Boston. Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers David Pitt in Des Moines, Iowa; John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas; Amy Beth Hanson in Helena, Montana; James MacPherson in Bismarck, North Dakota, Keith Ridler in Boise, Idaho; Michelle Price in Las Vegas and Sophia Eppolito and Lindsay Whitehurst in Salt Lake City.

Share:
More In Politics
Rittenhouse, Mcmichaels Trials Felt Across The Country
Two murder trials in focus in America — Wisconsin V. Kyle Rittenhouse and Georgia V. Travis Mcmichael, Gregory Mcmichael, and William Bryan, the Men who killed Ahmaud Arbery. Civil rights and criminal defense lawyer Anthony Tall and the Founder and CEO of Kim Crowder consulting Kim Crowder, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
Robinhood Cleared by Federal Judge in Meme Stock Lawsuit
A federal judge tossed out a lawsuit against financial services platform Robinhood following the meme stock saga that swept the investment world. The judge said it found no wrongdoing on Robinhood's part after the platform halted trading on popular meme stocks Gamestop and AMC.
Verdict Watch, Patient Zero & Love, Hate, Ate
Jill and Carlo are back to cover the latest in the Rittenhouse trial, new information on the origins of Covid, return-to-office and more. JOIN US FOR THE YOUTUBE WATCH PARTY @ 9aET: http://www.youtube.com/cheddarnow
Migrants Lives 'at Great Risk' in Geopolitical Battle Along Poland-Belarus Border
Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko has been accused by the EU of manufacturing a migration crisis along his border with Poland. But, even as tensions appear to be stabilizing at the moment, Ali Noorani, the president and CEO of National Immigration Forum and the host of the "Only in America" podcast spoke to Cheddar about the ongoing danger to the migrants who hail from countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. "What is going to happen to folks who are in Belarus who came from these countries? Is Lukashenko going to provide them asylum and protection in Belarus, or are they going to continue to be political pawns in a geopolitical battle," he said. "Real people's lives are being put at great risk."
Crypto Investors Look To Purchase Original Copy Of The U.S. Constitution
A group of crypto investors has come together to raise millions of dollars in the hopes of owning a rare piece of the U.S. Constitution. According to the crypto group, "Constitution DAO" It is time to put the constitution in the hands of the people. CEO and Founder of Metaversal Yossi Hasson, joined Cheddar to discuss more.
Here's Why You Might Not Fit in Either Political Party
Polarization is among the defining traits of American politics in the 21st century. Sometimes it seems like the only thing we can all agree on is the fact that we don't really agree on anything. But those divisions don't just stop at whether you vote red or blue. A new survey from the Pew Research Center finds that rather than just two political buckets, we have nine. The "2021 political typology" as it's called distinguishes between different ideological subsets in the Democratic and Republican party. It encompasses everyone from the loudest revolutionary lefties, to the loudest insurrection apologists on the right. Andrew Daniller, research associate at the Pew Research Center, joins None of the Above to discuss.
Can Democrats Capitalize on Infrastructure?
Tanya Snyder, transportation reporter at Politico, joins None of the Above with J.D. Durkin to discuss the bipartisan infrastructure law, what it means for the electric vehicle industry and whether Democrats will be able to capitalize on the legislative victory ahead of the 2022 midterms.
Load More