Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert expressed his disappointment over the Court's rejection of his lawsuit against Vice President Mike Pence, indicating that the federal judge's response has more serious implications.
Gohmert, along with GOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward and other GOP officials, recently filed a lawsuit against Pence seeking to give him power to reject the results of the Electoral College vote, particularly from the key battleground states.
The lawsuit, while having placed Pence as the sole Defendant, asks the Court to render as invalid the Electoral Count Act of 1887 for limiting the office of the Vice President's power, specifically his "exclusive authority and sole discretion under the Twelfth Amendment to determine which slates of electors for a State, or neither, may be counted."
The 1887 law says the Vice President, as president of the Senate, will "open all the certificates" or the papers that contain the results from the Electoral College's votes from each state. He will then present them before both houses of Congress to certify the results of the elections on the day appointed, which is, in this case, Jan. 6, 2021.
Should the lawsuit be successful and the Court approve its request, Pence will be able to reject the Electoral votes from the battleground states where massive voter fraud occurred. He can then choose to accept the votes cast by an "alternative" slate of electors from each state instead.
Pence, through lawyers, requested the Court to dismiss the lawsuit for various reasons - one of them being that while the lawsuit seeks to grant him the aforementioned powers, he has been listed as its sole Defendant. "The Vice President is not the proper Defendant to this lawsuit," Pence's brief said.
The Vice President's brief also presented various explanations as to why the Court should dismiss Gohmert's lawsuit, including the latter's inability to establish as to whether an "actual controversy" of legal interests between the Plaintiffs and Defendants exist at all.
Judge Jeremy Kernodle, one of President Donald Trump's appointees, dismissed the lawsuit due to "lack of standing."
Per Kernodle's order of dismissal, before the Court could accept the case, the Plaintiffs have to prove that they have standing.
"One crucial component of jurisdiction is that the Plaintiffs have standing," it said, adding that "the Plaintiffs to show a personal injury that is fairly traceable to the Defendant's allegedly unlawful conduct and is likely to be redressed by the requested relief."
Rep. Gohmert, speaking with Newsmax, indicated that the Court's reason for dismissing the lawsuit has some serious effects.
The Texas Representative, who has decades of experience in the Court system as a litigant, as a judge and as a fellow chief justice, explained that if he -a member of Congress- has "no standing," then others won't have it as well.
"If a member of Congress who s going to object to electors that will fraudulently sit there and the state has had two sets - and I don't have standing to go to court and say 'the Electors Act, it has got an unconstitutional provision.' If I don't have standing to do that, nobody does," he said.
He then explained that so far, the Trump campaign was only able to present its evidence of voter fraud a few times since the Nov. 3 elections. Courts wouldn't let them, Gohmert said. Every time the President's legal team was able to present evidence, however, people were shocked to find that indeed, there is massive evidence proving that voter fraud happened, and it's undeniable.
The Court's rejection of his recent lawsuit against the Vice President, then, seems to be another cowardly move, just like how the Supreme Court also rejected the State of Texas's lawsuit against six other states.
"Bottom line is, the court is saying, 'we're not gonna touch this. You have no remedy.' Basically, in fact, the ruling would be that you gotta go to the streets and be as violent as Antifa and BLM," Gohmert said.
