Conservative judge likens Trump case in Pennsylvania to Frankenstein's monster

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann — a conservative jurist — on Saturday threw out yet another lawsuit filed by the Trump campaign seeking to block the certification of the presidential election results in Pennsylvania.

The campaign's attorneys argued Pennsylvania counties violated the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law by taking different approaches to notifying voters before the election about mistakes on their mail-in ballots — some counties allowed voters to fix the errors, while others didn't notify them at all. Brann dismissed the argument entirely. He wrote that plaintiffs "seeking such a startling outcome" should "come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption," but instead the campaign presented "strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations." He likened the campaign's allegations of an equal protection violation to Frankenstein's monster, writing that it "has been haphazardly stitched together from two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent."

Brann's decision sealed the deal for Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who, much to President Trump's chagrin, congratulated President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris on their victory shortly after it was made.

The Trump team isn't giving up in this instance, however. Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, along with legal adviser Jenna Ellis, released a statement arguing Brann's ruling actually helps their case because it will speed up their path to the Supreme Court. Read more at The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press.

More stories from theweek.com
Biden is stealing the spotlight. Trump can't stand it.
I was wrong about Mitt Romney
The Secret Service is reportedly preparing for Trump's 'post-presidency life'