New Election Decertification Complaint Filed in D.C. Federal Court

Updated 42 weeks ago by Tony E. Rutherford, News Editor

A lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for D.C. on Dec. 22 seeks to decertify the presidential election contending that legislatures in multiple battleground states have not met to "certify" the election in their state. 

Plaintiffs include Voter Alliances for Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, Election Integrity Alliances for Arizona and Michigan. Named Defendants include Vice President , House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Electoral College,  various governors and state legislatures. 

"In drafting Article II, the Framers of the Constitution reasoned state legislatures should select Presidential electors so as “to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder” and to place “every practicable obstacle [to] cabal, intrigue, and corruption,” including “foreign powers” that might try to insinuate themselves into our elections.1 Article II limited Congress’s role in selecting the President and provided no constitutional role for Governors. Yet, at present state legislatures are unable to meet. This inability to meet has existed from election day and continues through various congressionally set deadlines for the appointment of presidential electors and the counting of presidential elector votes. The states legislatures of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia and Arizona (“Defendant States”) are unable to review the manner in which the election was conducted, are prevented from exercising their investigative powers and are unable to vote, debate or as a body speak to the conduct of the election. In sum, State legislatures are impotent to respond to what happened in the November 3, 2020 election."

In essence, the suit alleges that state legislatures have a duty to meet , conduct oversight concerning the election, and appoint representatives (not the executive branch) who reflect the will of the voters in each state:


"For federal elections, state legislatures under Article II have no authority to delegate post-election certification of Presidential electors to state executive branch officials. Yet, they did. That is the harm for the voters. It is the Electors Clause that gives state legislatures the exclusive right to post-election certification of Presidential electors—not state executive branch officials. 44. This lawsuit is not about voter fraud. The harm here is the loss of a voter remedy under Article II conducted as a core governmental function under federal and state election laws to ensure the integrity of the election. In turn, the acceptance of the outcome without state legislative post-election certification of Presidential electors interferes with the social contract between the voter and the government—causing injury to the voter."

Click on link to read complaint. Download the PDF by clicking on attachment.