Table 1: Individual judicial decisions (votes) in 2020 presidential election casesĬounts of 2020 election lawsuits vary. By that measure, 14% of judges’ individual decisions or votes-18% in state cases only-were favorable to Trump.
#Trumps campaign subvert election trial#
A case might produce an initial decision in a trial court, another set of votes on appeal to a multi-judge intermediate appellate court, and a final set of votes on appeal to the jurisdiction’s multi-judge supreme court-one case, but perhaps over 10 separate judicial votes. This post examines all judicial decisions in the cases, not just the cases’ ultimate outcomes. Looked at differently, as I do in this post, Trump performed slightly better. One victory out of 62 cases is about a 1.5% win rate. USA Today provided the conventional assessment of those challenges: “Out of the 62 lawsuits filed challenging the presidential election, 61 have failed,” and “decisions have came from both Democratic-appointed and Republican-appointed judges.” (In fact, most of the judges were elected state judges.) That does not mean he will be silent during litigation over future elections, especially if, as is likely, that litigation is less slap dash than the challenges in 2020.
Trump’s election litigation efforts failed decisively, even though more judges than is generally assumed found his lawyers’ arguments persuasive.ĭespite his judicial failures-and unlike autocratic executives who have tried to silence independent judges, such as Hungary, India, and Poland-Trump apparently did not try to intimidate judges as he did state election officials.
0 kommentar(er)
