Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) stated that his legal challenge to the Supreme Court isn’t over despite being denied an emergency order earlier this week.
“All that happened is we were not granted temporary injunctive relief,” Kelly told Newsmax on Wednesday. “The case is still alive and well.”
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday denied Kelly’s request—which was also joined by congressional candidate Sean Parnell and other Republicans—after he sought to prevent Pennsylvania state officials from taking further action to certify the state’s election results.
“And we are looking, how do we get the court to take on the case for its merits of being constitutional or unconstitutional. That’s all we’re looking at,” Kelly said. “That’s a huge ask, by the way. But we are in the midst of a constitutional crisis right now in our country, and we have to get answers, and we have to get it from the highest court in the land.”
Kelly’s case argued that Pennsylvania’s Legislature acted in an unconstitutional manner by passing a law known as Act 77 last year to expand the usage of mail-in ballots. His lawyers said Pennsylvania lawmakers violated the state Constitution.
But the Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the request for relief.
“The application for injunctive relief presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is denied,” said the court’s single-sentence order. It did not offer a dissenting opinion.
Following the Supreme Court’s denial, Kelly stated what they “can do now is we petition the court to hear (our) case. It’s called cert.”
“That’s what we’re asking the court to do. Hear the lawsuit based on its merits. That’s all we’re asking: constitutional, unconstitutional. Then make a decision afterwards of what are those findings and what are the remedies,” Kelly said. “Play up to the whistle. Play up to the echo of the whistle.”
Lawyers representing Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration called on the Supreme Court to reject his lawsuit.
“No court has ever issued an order nullifying the governor’s certification of presidential election results,” the lawyers said, arguing that it could set a precedent for the “judicial invalidation” of an election.
Kelly’s lawyer, Greg Teufel, told The Epoch Times that Kelly and the other plaintiffs will file a separate petition for a writ of certiorari with a request to expedite the case in due course.
In the meantime, another case sent to the Supreme Court from Texas has sought to prevent Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan from participating in the Electoral College due to a number of irregularities and last-minute voter law changes. At least 17 other states have joined Texas’ lawsuit.