Legal Scholar Argues that States Which Were Undecided on the Winner of the Presidential Race at Midnight Election Day Acted Outside the Constitution and Their Results Are Therefore Void

The Constitution demands that the Presidential race be held on a specific day (the first Tuesday in November) and should be completed on that day – argues a legal expert.

One legal scholar argues the above and presents his case in detail at thepostemail.com.  The argument is simple.  The Constitution requires Presidential elections to be performed on a certain day.  It doesn’t say they should run on for days or  weeks like we saw in 2020.  Any states who waited till after election day to manufacture votes and steal the election for Joe Biden are in trouble.  These states’ results are void due to being outside Constitutional mandates.

Below are excerpts from this reasonable argument:

“When the federal statutes speak of ‘the election’… they plainly refer to the combined actions of voters and officials meant to make a final selection of an officeholder… By establishing a particular day as ‘the day’ on which these actions must take place, the statutes simply regulate the time of the election, a matter on which the Constitution explicitly gives Congress the final say.”  Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67, 71-72 (1997)

We will take a closer at this binding precedent below, but in preview, please understand that it emanates from a 9-0 decision of the United States Supreme Court, wherein the entire Court joined, not just the outcome, but also the opinion on this very point.

The voters vote.  The officials count.  These combined actions form “the election,” and the election must be decided on the day.  States that failed to make a final selection of officeholder by midnight after Election Day have violated the statute, subjecting the nation at large to the very evils Congressionally mandated deadlines were drafted to prevent.

Federal Election Day statutes were designed to curtail fraud, and to infuse a prima facie sense of integrity in our electoral process.  But these States – in failing to obey Congressional deadlines – have flagrantly attempted to preempt federal law.  This is certainly prohibited, and this is why the late election results are void…

…I honestly do not believe the Supreme Court can avoid nullifying the Presidential Election… if President Trump, and some of you too, will plead this in court…

…3 U.S.C. § 2 kicks the decision back to the State Legislatures after a failed election renders the previous results void. Failed elections nullify all votes, not just some votes, not just late votes, not just illegal votes. The election itself is void in late States.

Which States are late? The answer will be a question of first impression for the Supreme Court. But the only fair answer is obvious. If, at midnight, one candidate had enough of a lead, so that there was no mathematical possibility whatsoever of their being caught – after a review of the votes already counted, and the votes remaining – then the final selection has been made on time. But if the outcome was uncertain at Midnight, the State violated the deadline, and its election is void…

…State elections that fail to choose winners by the Midnight deadline enacted in 3 U.S.C. § 1, immediately trigger the authority of 3 U.S.C. § 2, giving the Legislatures alone a Congressional extension to choose electors thereafter. As such, the failed elections are void, and all State statutes drafted to discern a winner after Election Day are preempted by 3 U.S.C § 1, and § 2…

…The elections for President in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada were void at the stroke of midnight after Election Day, because a victorious candidate wasn’t discerned by Midnight…

…It’s important to note here that early voting helps reduce the stress on a State’s electoral process, by pre-canvassing ballots in advance. This makes it much easier for a State to make a final selection on Election Day, whereas elections consummated after Election Day contribute nothing to electoral efficiency and are subject to many of the same evils as multi-day voting…

…Reading Foster v. Love, together with the 9th Circuit’s analysis in Voting Integrity Project v. Keisling, we know that consummating an election before federal Election Day is prohibited, and that early voting is not prohibited, as long as the election is finally consummated on Election Day. If that be the case, then statutory construction makes it obvious that elections consummated after Election Day are preempted by the federal Election Day statutes.

This legal argument is sound.  The six states mentioned above who didn’t declare a Presidential winner on Election Day acted outside the Constitution (which doesn’t even consider the massive amount of fraud that occurred everywhere).   These states should resolve these voided elections in their legislatures.

The post Legal Scholar Argues that States Which Were Undecided on the Winner of the Presidential Race at Midnight Election Day Acted Outside the Constitution and Their Results Are Therefore Void appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.



Source: The Gateway Pundit, Legal Scholar Argues that States Which Were Undecided on the Winner of the Presidential Race at Midnight Election Day Acted Outside the Constitution and Their Results Are Therefore Void