Some Democrats completely wrote off President Donald Trump’s election-related challenges on Friday when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up a Texas-led and Trump-supported lawsuit aimed at the election processes in certain swing states.
The challenges clearly continue, however, as evidenced in the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision to hear a lawsuit challenging disputed election results in two heavily-Democratic counties.
A rare Saturday hearing
That lawsuit, which had been dismissed on Friday morning by a circuit court judge, received new life just hours later when the state Supreme Court agreed to expedite the appeals process and hold a rare Saturday hearing to decide the case.
At issue are allegations of improper and unconstitutional processes in Dane and Milwaukee counties, and plaintiffs in the case are essentially requesting hundreds of thousands of disputed absentee and mail-in ballots to be excluded from the final tally.
According to The Hill, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which narrowly leans in favor of conservatives, held the weekend hearing ahead of Monday’s deadline on which the Electoral College is set to meet and cast its votes to determine the official winner.
Wisconsin officials already certified the state’s vote, declaring on Nov. 30 and after a partial recount that Democratic nominee Joe Biden won with a 20,600 advantage over Trump.
Of course, the president’s legal team has looked to Jan. 6, the date on which Congress will meet to receive and vote on the Electoral College’s determination, as the real deadline for challenges.
“No credible evidence”
According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, the latest suit had earlier been rejected by the state Supreme Court on procedural grounds as Trump’s lawyers attempted to bypass lower courts to have the challenge heard directly by the state’s highest court.
The case was nonetheless sent to a lower court and ended up before Reserve Judge Stephen Simanek, who proclaimed there had been “no credible evidence of misconduct or wide-scale fraud” and declared the challenged processes to have been legal and acceptable.
Among the alleged actions challenged by the plaintiffs are election workers filling out missing information on ballot envelopes, improperly accepting early in-person ballots, and allowing absentee ballots to be submitted without standard identity verifications in some cases because of the ongoing pandemic.
As of the latest updates available, there was no indication how the state Supreme Court would rule on the merits of the case.
No matter the outcome, the decision to entertain this challenge serves as evidence that the fight over last month’s disputed election is not over.