Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has agreed to argue the Pennsylvania mail-in ballot case if it gets to the Supreme Court. He is the first senator to publicly support the appeal.
Cruz, a high-profile U.S. senator, is an expert constitutional lawyer. He has been supportive of a push to have the case that challenges the constitutionality of the decided election results in Pennsylvania to be heard in the U.S.’s highest court.
Pennsylvania’s highest court dismissed the suit and blamed the petitioners for a “complete failure to act with due diligence in commencing their farcical constitutional challenge” in the court’s ruling.
Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) leads the case, and Cruz indicated to Fox News on Monday, Dec. 7, that he is willing to argue the case.
“This appeal raises serious legal issues, and I believe the Court should hear the case on an expedited basis,” Cruz said in a statement.
“If #SCOTUS grants cert in the PA election case, I have told the petitioners I will stand ready to present the oral argument,” Cruz stated in a tweet accompanied by a video of his remarks to Fox News.
If #SCOTUS grants cert in the PA election case, I have told the petitioners I will stand ready to present the oral argument.
Full statement below… pic.twitter.com/EnHxjqGR5K
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) December 7, 2020
“Petitioners’ legal team has asked me whether I would be willing to argue the case before #SCOTUS, if the Court grants certiorari,” Cruz continued. “I have agreed and told them that, if the Court takes the appeal, I will stand ready to present the oral argument.”
“As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution. I believe #SCOTUS has a responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution,” Cruz concluded.
“The Pennsylvania Constitution requires in-person voting, except in narrow and defined circumstances. Late last year, the Pennsylvania Legislature passed a law that purported to allow universal mail-in voting, notwithstanding the Pennsylvania Constitution’s express prohibition,” said Cruz.
“This appeal argues that Pennsylvania cannot change the rules in the middle of the game,” said Cruz.