Fox News host Sean Hannity reacts to Supreme Court ruling and latest 2020 election developments
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Nor am I,
nor are you,
nor is the audience
huge breaking news.
The United States Supreme Court
just ordered a response to the
legal challenge that was filed
by the State of Texas, where
officials there are now
contesting the election results
in Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan
and Pennsylvania.
This is the blockbuster suit. We
told you was likely coming.
We began to discuss it.
The deadline for the response is
Thursday by 300 p dot m.
This challenge has now
officially survived outright
dismissal. Contrary to what many
experts who are predicting today
could be a game changer.
We will lay out the case and
have exclusive reaction from the
person who brought that suit. If
Texas Attorney General KEN
Paxton,
we begin with first tonight,
though, you need to know about
this critical new challenge.
All you need to know
the mob, the media. They will
all dismiss it.
This is a well written case.
It was well thought out and it
was well delivered and
apparently received well enough
that they want to hear
arguments
first and foremost, article III
are our: U Dot S constitution.
This is really not complicated.
Stay with us
requires the case be filed
directly at the: U Dot S Supreme
Court, which has whats called
original jurisdiction in
disputes against multiple
states.
If the Supreme Court decides to
take up the case, the justices
will be tasked with deciding
whether or not these states,
Georgia, Wisconsin Michigan
Pennsylvania, whether in fact
they violated the? U dot S
constitution in a variety of
ways. That is all laid out here
in this suit brought by Texas.
It includes Article ii of our
constitution, which clearly
articulates the following.
Each state shall appoint in such
manner as the legislature
thereof may direct a number of
electors.
In other words, it is
constitutionally up to state
legislatures to decide election
policy,
for example in Pennsylvania. We
already all know this was
clearly violated when the
mail in ballot deadline was
pushed back without approval.
Article ii was likely violate
thered the state of Georgia, with
that idiotic consent decree
which relaxed signature,
verification requirements in
mail in ballots, creating what
was an unequal system.
This policy was once again done
without lawmaker approval.
It was a consent agreement with
the Secretary of State of
Georgia and constitutionally. As
we pointed out, it is the
legislature of Georgia that
should have decided any such
thing.
Welsh remember that lawsuit was
brought by the Georgia
Democratic Party,
the democratic senatorial
Campaign Committee and the
democratic congressional
campaign commit teus.
This was a consent agreement
just with the Secretary of State,
not with the state legislature
thats. Not all
this New Texas suit also alleges
multiple violations of what is
known as the equal protection
clause and relies on very
compelling court precedent.
Chris Kobach had a great
interview with me on radio
today pointed in a terrific op
ed in the land mark case you
heard of it Bush v Gore,
the Supreme Court agreed it
violated the amendment when one
Florida county treated ballots,
one way and another county
treated ballots a whole
different way.
We saw clear examples of all of
this unequal treatment among
counties in state after state
that includes vastly different
policy force, election observers
poll workers and county
procedures
in Michigan. We know some of the
counties denied access to any
partisan observers which the
statutory language calls for,
and other counties forced
observers back at a distance of
six feet.
Others twenty feet away from the
vote, counting process which
prevented them from doing what
they were legally allowed to do
and frankly, was written into
the law.
Other counties decided to allow
full access to partisan
observers.
Ask yourself: how is that
unequal application of the law?
Make no mistake.
This case deserves to be heard.
It has merit and precedent, and
the american people deserve
their day in court.
If laws are violated in one
state, voters feel the
consequences
that would be lets say:
disenfranchising their honest
and legal votes
thats. Why? According to the
suit quote a dark cloud, hangs
over the twenty twenty presidential
election,
this new gallop poll, eighty nine percent of
Americans have serious doubts
about this election process.
Fifty seven percent of Republicans dont want
the president to concede.
Today the president called on
lawmakers the Supreme Court to
do what is right,
take a look.
Hopefully, the next
administration will be the Trump
administration, because you cant
steal hundreds of thousands of
votes.
You cant have fraud and
deception and all of the things
that they did and then slightly
win a swing state and you just
have to look at the numbers.
Look at whats been on tape.
Look at all the corruption and
well see
you cant win an election like
that.
Lets see whether or not
somebody has the courage,
whether its a legislateor or
legislatures, or whether its a
justice of the Supreme Court or
a number of justices of the
Supreme Court
lets see if they have the
courage to do what everybody in
this country knows is right
tonight. Like
always, we will continue our own
independent path.
We dont follow the mob, the
media, any other show
we do our own thing here.
Lawsuit from Texas is a very
serious legal challenge. At the
very least,
it has a right to be heard.
The country deserves it.
You deserve it.
We the people deserve it.
I dont know what the justices
are going to do, but the
american people deserve answers.
We need to have confidence in
both the integrity and the
results of every states
election in the process, because
we have millions of innocent
Americans in states where the
law the constitution were
followed.
They are then disenfranchised in
a corrupt process,
its not okay, that partisan
observers are blocked from
performing what they are legally
allowed and the law calls for
them to do
their critical duties.
Its not okay. The chain of
custody gets lost,
its not okay. Election laws are
changed by politicians at a whim
in the middle or after the
games been played without any
legislative approval.
Its not okay, that mail in
ballots have different signature,
verification requirements and in
person ballots, as the Texas suit
perfectly describes, our country
stands at an important
crossroads:
either the constitution matters
and must be followed, even when
some officials consider it
inconvenient or out of date or
simply a piece of parchment on
display at the national
archives.
We ask the court to choose the
former
in the coming days: the, U Dot S
Supreme Court, will send an
important message. Make no
mistake. Whatever happens, this
will have serious long, lasting
implications ramifications for
every single election to come
thats. Why tonight, every decent
republican attorney general with
a brain needs to get busy.
Transcript generated on 2020-12-08.