in

Wisconsin Supreme Court rules against Trump lawsuit

A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to hear President Donald Trump’s lawsuit attempting to reverse his election loss to Democrat Joe Biden in this crucial state, circumventing a decision on the merits of the lawsuits, and instead ruled. that the case must first go through the courts of first instance.

In another blow to Trump, two conservative judges questioned whether nullifying more than 221,000 votes, as the president wanted, would be the appropriate remedy for the errors he alleged.

The defeat in a 4-up, 3-vote ruling is the latest in the lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign after the election. The judges of several decisive states have rejected his claims that there was fraud or irregularities in the process.

Trump asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to disqualify more than 221,000 votes in the state’s two largest Democratic counties, citing irregularities in the way mailed votes were administered. His lawsuit echoed claims that were previously rejected by election officials in those counties during a recount that barely affected Biden’s winning margin of about 20,700 votes.

Jim Troupis, Trump’s attorney, said he would present the case immediately to the circuit court and hoped to return “very soon” to the Supreme Court.

“It was evident from what they wrote that the court recognizes the seriousness of these issues, and we look forward to taking the next step,” he said in a statement.

In his petition for the conservative-majority Wisconsin Supreme Court to take the case directly, Trump had argued that there was insufficient time to wage the legal dispute if it began in a lower court, given the impending date of December 14 in that presidential electors cast their votes.

Judge Brian Hagedorn joined three liberal justices in rejecting the petition without weighing Trump’s accusations. Hagedorn said the law clearly specifies that the president must start with his claim in lower courts, where factual disputes can be resolved.

“We do well as a judicial body to abide by legal standards that have proven effective over time, even – and perhaps particularly – in high-profile cases,” wrote Hagedorn. “Complying with this law is not neglecting our duty, as some of my colleagues imply. It is to respect the law ”.

Trump filed a similar lawsuit in federal court.

The president of the highest court, Patience Roggensack, in a dissent in which she was joined by Judge Annette Ziegler, said that she would have taken the case and referred it to the lower courts for a determination of the facts, which could later have been reported back to the Supreme Court for a ruling.

But he also questioned whether nullifying the votes was an appropriate thing to do, noting that “it could be out of our reach for a number of reasons.”

State Governor Tony Evers welcomed the decision.

“I was frankly surprised that it was not unanimous,” he said.

Trump’s lawsuit challenged procedures that have been in place for years and have never been deemed illegal.

when it starts and what the December calendar looks like

Mexico is among the 25 countries that spy on their citizens