Though the U.S. Supreme Court is presently debating the “independent state legislature” theory in Moore v. Harper concerning North Carolina’s redistricting, that case would not ultimately affect the 2020 Presidential Election results. In contrast, a little-known case on the Court docket could potentially do just that. Four brothers from Utah recently filed a lawsuit, Brunson v. Adams, against President Biden and Vice President Harris- among other government officials who voted to certify the Electoral College without investigating potential election fraud in various states. This case has gone unnoticed by mainstream media. The outcome of such relief would presumably be to restore Donald Trump to the presidency.
The national security interests connected to this case allowed the Brunsons alternatives to an appeal that was at a standstill in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. The Supreme Court has set a hearing for January 6, 2023.The Brunson Petition for a Writ of Certiorari would only require the votes of four Justices to move the case forward. It is astounding that the Court would venture into such controversial territory two years to the day after Joe Biden was voted in as President by Congress. But these are not normal times. During this month’s lame duck session, Democrats might propose legislation to impose term limits and a retirement age for Justices. If successful, this would allow the Court to be packed with new members. A course like this would appear to violate Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution, which requires that Justices “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.” Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, several Justices and their families have been living under constant threats to their personal security from both institutional and individual sources.
Maybe the many dangers to institutions and safety have incentivized the Court to add Brunson v. Adams to its dockets, in order to stop any attempts by Congresspeople who are about to leave office from violating the Court’s independence. Perhaps conservatives on the Court are using the Brunson case as a way to remove public officials who they believe have not conducted investigations of allegations of election fraud and foreign election interference, by rubber-stamping Electors on Jan. 6th.
Further, recent weeks’ news cycles strongly suggest an impending constitutional crisis that may only be resolvable with the Court’s involvement. The FBI’s recent actions of collusion with Twitter and Facebook to suppress Hunter Biden laptop news before the 2020 election was a grave violation of the First Amendment. This was done with clear intent to interfere with the election outcome, and potentially install an ineligible government. As President Trump’s tweets from January 6th are a reminder that he was not inciting insurrection but merely calling for peaceful protest, the committee investigating the events of that day may soon send a criminal referral to the Justice Department. More recently, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was working with Big Tech companies to silence those who were critical of the election results.
The Supreme Court Justices may perceive the essentiality of their interference to stop wider riots that could emerge from violations of the Constitution during both the 2020 and 2022 elections. When people break state and federal law by committing election fraud, we rely on investigations by agencies ranging from local police forces to the FBI. Unfortunately, these groups have become corrupted over time and many members are now party to these crimes. The only way to solve the problem when they break the Constitution and rig an election, may be through military tribunals or the Supreme Court.
The lawsuit filed by Brunson argues that before Congress voted on January 6th, more than one hundred of its own members were made aware of the serious allegations concerning election frauds and they called for an electoral commission to investigate these claims.
The ODNI was supposed to hand in a report on foreign dangers to the 2020 election by December 18, 2020, as set by both an executive order and Congress. Given that December 18th passed without the ODNI report, Congress should begin questioning and investigating. On that day, DNI John Ratcliffe announced that the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies he oversaw had found evidence of foreign election interference but were split on its significance and whether such a national security breach was enough to upend the election’s outcome. In spite of this, Congress took no action whatsoever. They didn’t investigate or inquire. Instead, they rubber-stamped the possibly fraudulent election results on January 6th without demanding answers from the DNI and Intelligence Community.
In 1876, when the results of the Presidential election were undetermined, Congress formed a special Electoral Commission- consisting of five House members, five Senators, and five Supreme Court Justices- to look into it. In early 2021 however, Congress had nearly two weeks to investigate before Inauguration Day on January 20th. If Congress had waited just one more day, they would have received the ODNI report that reflected a split in the Intelligence Community and the DNI’s own conclusion that China had interfered to influence the outcome of the presidential election. Dr. Barry A. Zulauf, the Analytic Ombudsman for the Intelligence Community, found that community members shamefully delayed their findings until after January 6th’s Electoral College certification by Congress because of political disagreements with then-President Trump’s administration. This depicts collusion and conspiracy between members of Congress and U.S. intelligence agencies to cover up evidence of foreign election interference, which is classified as the crime of High Treason.
Although the Brunson lawsuit does not explicitly state that the election was stolen, it does allude to the fact that Congress violated their Oath of Office by failing to investigate such grave allegations of election rigging and national security breaches.
The very fact that the Brunson case is being brought before the Court suggests grave concerns about those whoJanuary 6th without regard for law, Congressional committees driven by politics instead of principle, federal agencies motivated more by personal agendas than duty, and constitutional violations on a scale large enough to threaten our system of government itself – all carried out in an attempt to force a change in the results of the presidential election.