After a chaotic month of waiting and full of allegations of fraud, one of the two candidates wins, thanks to a court ruling, the U.S. presidential election. This is the nightmare that haunts just some Americans: After a tight election with record turnout could ultimately be decided by a judge.
There are two reasons why this bad dream can be a fantasy be saved: first, it is in the case of the election in the year 2000, exactly so; and, secondly, the lawyers prepare themselves in view of the foreseeable closeness of the result on this scenario.
Wild allegations of fraud, threats of lawsuits and demands for a recount – all of this happened just a few hours after the closure of the last polling stations before the votes were tallied. US President, Donald Trump has already declared himself the winner, also his democratic Challenger, Joe Biden showed himself sure of victory, said, the counting to be seen. In view of the closeness of the result a tough spat seems to be in the coming weeks, almost inevitable.
The Power of the courts
Courts can not decide on the outcome of the election itself, not even the Supreme Court in Washington. Judges are not in favour of a Review of the results. Local courts or higher-level instances can, however, rules on the legality of the deadlines, Counting, or the validity of the results decide.
Is sued in the United States quickly and much. In the vast majority of election years, if a candidate has a big lead, could influence one or two complaints, the outcome of the elections. In view of the foreseeable scarce results in States such as Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that could be different this year, too. Because of the majority electoral law, a candidate can secure a state of theoretically by a single vote.
People in Michigan: “stop the Counting”
Photo: REBECCA COOK / REUTERS
Trump spoke on Wednesday with a view to the current count already of massive fraud. “You will find anywhere to vote for Biden in Pennsylvania, in Wisconsin and in Michigan. So bad for our country,” he wrote on Twitter:
Experts and studies show that election fraud is in the United States but is extremely rare. Twitter provided several news Trumps immediately, with a warning label and restricted so that the possibility of the dissemination of Tweets.
Trump’s campaign team announced that it plans to apply in Wisconsin, a recount of the votes. In Michigan, they filed a lawsuit to stop the counting. Just as in Pennsylvania. In the three States to be awarded the votes from the 46 choice of people. A candidate needs to win 270 votes. Biden seems to be forward to, but it is likely to be scarce. Also in the state of Georgia, the Republicans filed a lawsuit.
Advertise for donations for legal costs
The majority leader of the Republicans in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, stated that he thought trump’s announcement, the battle for the electoral court to continue, for not a problem. In the case of a tight election result “has this happened before and could happen this Time,” said the Trump Trusted. To go “before a court, is the way how we resolve the uncertainties.”
The Democrats promoted immediately to raise funds for litigation costs. They were threats to Trumps “ready to strike back,” wrote Biden’s Vice-candidate Kamala Harris on Twitter. “Our work could take weeks and we need your help”, – was stated in the call for donations.
Democrats and Republicans had already committed to before the election, numerous lawyers. Some actions are likely to be fought by all instances, and could ultimately land at the Supreme court in Washington, the Supreme Court,. There is Trump to apply a home-field advantage: Six of the nine appointed for life judges as conservative, three of which the Republicans are self-nominated.
The Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.
Photo: J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Some of the actions around the election were already landed before the vote in the judges, it was mostly technical questions. A topic of debate, for example, was the question of whether a deadline for acceptance of ballot papers from a court may be changed, or only by the Parliament of the concerned state.
In the case of the decisions of the judges, there is no clear party settled in the sum of secular trend. The until the end of October, appointed conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett contained in several decisions. In the case of a decision on the adoption of the ballots in Pennsylvania after the election day, the judges reserved explicitly to address the question to the vote again.
Memories of the 2000 election
This is for some observers a nightmare: What would happen if Biden Pennsylvania would only win just with the help of the late arriving absentee votes? If the judge votes for the invalid, lose, Biden the 20 choice of the people of the state and perhaps the election.
It is a hypothetical scenario, but it is not plucked out of the air: it was So similar to 2000. Whether George W. Bush or Al Gore, the next President would belong at that time only the outcome in the population of the state of Florida.
Al Gore and George W. Bush: duel ums President in the year 2000
Photo: JOHN MOTTERN / AFP
The dispute is the result and Neuauszählungen dragged on for a month, to the Supreme court. After Gore conceded defeat. The Republican Bush won with a 537-vote lead, secured the votes of the election of the people of Florida and has a U.S. President.
Actions could deepen divisions in the country
Trump has already claimed before the election that he could lose only if there was “fraud, massive vote”. It seemed, therefore, as good as excluded, that he would, without a struggle, to admit his defeat. He will not let any cause of action fight. The United States is threatening therefore – in the midst of the more virulent Coronavirus pandemic – very restless weeks. The division of the country into two warring political camps expected to deepen further, it could also lead to protests.
The impasse could drag on for about a month: The Federal States have to 8 your final results to the. December to certify and to Washington to report. This period, as a “safe harbor” means (a safe Harbor), to provide, for example, in 2000, Gore’s decision, and his defeat decisive.
It should be about the period of time in addition to continuing dispute, it could be quite complicated. Really, the Americans should breathe a sigh of relief, therefore, probably until next year: On 20. January must be sworn in the next President, as the law requires it.
