Jones Day Statement Regarding Election Litigation

Jones Day is not representing President Trump, his campaign or any affiliated party in any litigation alleging voter fraud.

Metadata
Provider: 
Business Wire, Inc.Business Wire, Inc.
Retrieved on: 
Tuesday, November 10, 2020
Information
Tags: 
Professional services, Courts, White House, Federal Government, Public policy, Government, Legal, Elections, Campaigns, American people of German descent, Presidents of the United States, Donald Trump, Right-wing populism in the United States, Businesspeople, Politicians, Voting in the United States
Geotags: 
United States
⚠generated by AI ↴
Summary
Key Points: 
  • Jones Day is not representing President Trump, his campaign or any affiliated party in any litigation alleging voter fraud.
  • Jones Day also is not representing any entity in any litigation challenging or contesting the results of the 2020 general election.
  • Jones Day is representing the Pennsylvania GOP in pending litigation brought by private parties in April 2020 and the Pennsylvania Democratic Party in August 2020.
  • In that litigation, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an order extending the statutory deadline to return mail-in ballots established by the Pennsylvania General Assembly.


Jones Day is not representing President Trump, his campaign or any affiliated party in any litigation alleging voter fraud. Jones Day also is not representing any entity in any litigation challenging or contesting the results of the 2020 general election. Media reports to the contrary are false.

Jones Day is representing the Pennsylvania GOP in pending litigation brought by private parties in April 2020 and the Pennsylvania Democratic Party in August 2020. In that litigation, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued an order extending the statutory deadline to return mail-in ballots established by the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

The Republican Party of Pennsylvania, through Jones Day, has sought review in the United States Supreme Court on the ground that the order is unconstitutional because it usurped the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s plenary authority to determine election procedures including the deadline for absentee ballots. The United States Supreme Court is currently deciding whether to grant certiorari. Four justices agreed with our client’s position, and voted to grant a stay, indicating that they believed there was a fair prospect of review and reversal by the Court. Three justices have issued a statement that there is “a strong likelihood” that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s order violates the US Constitution. On November 6, Justice Alito ordered Pennsylvania election officials to segregate ballots arriving after the statutory deadline to preserve the issue and to have a record of the vote with and without the segregated ballots.

This case presents an important and recurring rule-of-law question under the U.S. Constitution. Indeed, on November 9, seventeen (17) States filed amicus briefs supporting this cert petition and asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant review.

Jones Day will not withdraw from that representation.

Jones Day expects that the media will correct the numerous false reports given the facts set forth above, all of which were readily verifiable in the public record.

Copyright: 
Copyright Business Wire 2020