Trump vows to continue election lawsuits, but road looks tough

President Donald Trump has made repeated claims of election fraud. But judges in Georgia and Michigan quickly dismissed two campaign lawsuits Thursday.

Carlos Barria/Reuters
U.S President Donald Trump returns to the White House after news media declared Democratic U.S. presidential nominee Joe Biden to be the winner of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, in Washington, on Nov. 7, 2020.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly said there’s one place he wants to determine the outcome of the presidential election: the United States Supreme Court. But he may have a difficult time ever getting there.

The Associated Press called the presidential race for Joe Biden on Saturday morning. Mr. Trump, however, has over the last few days leaned in to the idea that the high court should get involved in the election as it did in 2000, and there were no signs Saturday he was ready to concede.

“Beginning Monday, our campaign will start prosecuting our case in court to ensure election laws are fully upheld and the rightful winner is seated,” Mr. Trump said in a statement.

In 2000, the Supreme Court effectively settled the contested election for President George W. Bush in a 5-4 decision that split the court’s liberals and conservatives. Today, six members of the court are conservatives, including three nominated by Mr. Trump. But this year’s election seems to be shaping up very differently from 2000, when Florida’s electoral votes delivered the presidency to Mr. Bush.

Then, Mr. Bush led in Florida and went to court to stop a recount. Mr. Trump has suggested a strategy that would focus on multiple states where the winning margins appear to be slim. But to overturn the election result, Mr. Trump would appear to have to persuade courts, including perhaps the Supreme Court to set aside votes in two or more states.

Chief Justice John Roberts, for his part, is not likely to want the election to come down to himself and his colleagues. Justice Roberts, who was not on the court for Bush v. Gore in 2000 but was a lawyer for Mr. Bush, has often tried to distance the court from the political branches of government and the politics he thinks could hurt the court’s reputation.

It’s also not clear what legal issues might cause the justices to step in. Mr. Trump has made repeated, unsubstantiated claims of election fraud. On Saturday, Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani pressed claims that so-called poll watchers, who observe as ballots are counted, were not allowed to get close enough to witness counting.

Still, Mr. Trump has focused on the high court. In the early morning hours following Election Day he said: “We’ll be going to the U.S. Supreme Court – we want all voting to stop.” And on Thursday, as Mr. Biden inched closer to the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the White House, Mr. Trump again told Americans, “It’s going to end up, perhaps, at the highest court in the land, we’ll see.” On Twitter too he urged, “U.S. Supreme Court should decide!”

There is currently one election case at the Supreme Court and it involves a Republican appeal to exclude ballots that arrived after Election Day in Pennsylvania. But whether or not those ballots ultimately are counted seems irrelevant.

Ballots received after 8 p.m. on Election Day were a small fragment of the total vote count. Across Pennsylvania, counties reported receiving under 8,000 late mail-in ballots, though some were still assessing how many they had. Mr. Biden's lead over Mr. Trump by Saturday afternoon was more than 30,000 votes.

Still, Mr. Trump's campaign is trying to intervene in the case, an appeal of a decision by Pennsylvania’s highest court to allow three extra days for the receipt and counting of mailed ballots. Because the case is ongoing, those ballots are being separated but counted.

Beyond the Pennsylvania case, if Mr. Trump wanted to use a lawsuit to challenge the election outcome in a state, he’d need to begin by bringing a case in a lower court.

So far, Mr. Trump’s campaign and Republicans have mounted legal challenges in several states, but most are small-scale lawsuits that do not appear to affect many votes. On Thursday, the Trump campaign won an appellate ruling to get party and campaign observers closer to election workers who are processing mail-in ballots in Philadelphia. But judges in Georgia and Michigan quickly dismissed two other campaign lawsuits Thursday.

Mr. Biden’s campaign, meanwhile, has called the existing lawsuits meritless, more political strategy than based in legal concerns. Biden lawyer Bob Bauer on Thursday called the lawsuits “an opportunity for them to message falsely about what’s taking place in the electoral process.”

This story was reported by The Associated Press. Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Trump vows to continue election lawsuits, but road looks tough
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today