The big corporate news networks are trying to convince us that there is absolutely no way that the Supreme Court will rule in favor of President Trump and his allies in Texas v. Pennsylvania, but what if they are wrong?  The case is on the docket, and the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin have been ordered to file their responses by 3 PM on Thursday.  It appears that the Court understands the urgency of this matter, and they seem determined to move things along very quickly.  One way or the other, we should find out what they are thinking fairly rapidly.

In the first part of this series, I discussed the fact that 18 other states have now joined with Texas in arguing that the election results in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin cannot be allowed to stand.

And the more I examine the facts, the more I am convinced that their legal claims are right on target.

Everyone agrees that officials in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin changed election rules without consulting their legislatures.  But the Electors Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the sole authority in determining how electors will be selected.  The rule changes that officials in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin made were unconstitutional, and they had a material affect on the outcome in each of those states.