Yost filed an amicus transient on Thursday, criticizing the Texas AG’s lawsuit.
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Editor’s word: the video within the participant above is from a narrative printed on November 27, 2020.
Ohio Lawyer Basic Dave Yost on Thursday filed an opposing transient in opposition to the present case of Texas v. Pennsylvania, which goals to name into query the outcomes of Pennsylvania’s remaining presidential election outcomes.
Yost’s transient particularly mentions the Electors Clause of the U.S. Structure, which provides every state the proper to set their very own electors.
“Free and honest elections begin with clear guidelines that don’t change proper earlier than the election,” Yost wrote. “It isn’t unreasonable to surprise—and plenty of hundreds of thousands of People do—whether or not these rapidly carried out modifications uncovered the election methods to vulnerabilities.”
In an announcement launched by the Lawyer Basic’s workplace, Yost dives into his perception that states should not have the ability to change the foundations of their very own election within the eleventh hour, successfully blindsiding a state’s residents. Yost additionally claimed this creates a harmful precedent for future elections.
RELATED: 6 states be a part of Texas in lawsuit difficult 2020 election outcomes
“If there may be something extra American than consultant authorities, it’s a agency conviction that the foundations ought not be modified after the sport has begun,” Yost stated.
Yost argued it isn’t throughout the Supreme Court docket’s authority to try to overturn the outcomes of any state elections.
“Federal courts, similar to state courts, lack authority to alter the legislatively chosen methodology for appointing presidential electors,” he stated. “And so federal courts, similar to state courts, lack authority to order legislatures to nominate electors with out regard to the outcomes of an already-completed election.”
RELATED: Texas AG sues battleground states, unconstitutional modifications to 2020 election legal guidelines
Texas vs. Pennsylvania, filed by Texas Lawyer Basic Ken Paxton, “asks the Court docket to order the legislatures within the defendant states to nominate a brand new set of electors for the Electoral School, and believes the time has come for the Court docket to make a definitive resolution on how the Electors Clause must be interpreted.” Three Ohio congressmen–including Northeast Ohio’s Bob Gibbs and Jim Jordan–have signed on to an amicus transient supporting the controversial lawsuit.
However regardless of questions from different representatives and legislatures, Yost believes Ohio had a good election in 2020.
“As Lawyer Basic, I’ve efficiently defended Ohio’s legal guidelines governing elections, and Ohio didn’t expertise the chaos and uncertainty that different States did,” he stated. “I’ll proceed to face for the rule of regulation and with the folks, their proper to vote, and to have their vote counted.”