Utah Brothers Prepare Next Move After Supreme Court Turns Down Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Election

Utah Brothers Prepare Next Move After Supreme Court Turns Down Case Seeking to Overturn 2020 Election
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Dec. 4, 2022. (Daniel Slim/AFP via Getty Images)
Zachary Stieber
Petitioners in a case that would remove President Joe Biden from office if successful are preparing to return to the Supreme Court with what they hope is a stronger case after the nation’s top court turned down a request to review lower court decisions rejecting the effort.

“We’re not discouraged,” Deron Brunson, one of the brothers who brought the case, told The Epoch Times during a break on putting the finishing touches on a petition for rehearing.

That document will ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its stance on the case.

“If you feel like the petition didn’t grab their attention, you go back and request a rehearing,” Brunson said. “You revisit your claims but make them clearer and stronger.”

The petitioners plan to have the petition filed by Jan. 16.

The Case

Raland Brunson, Deron’s brother, originally brought the case in Utah court in mid-2021. It argues that by not moving to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election, and certifying the results for President Joe Biden, members of Congress violated their oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. A rigged election is an attack against the Constitution and achieves the same results as a war, or to give power to certain people, the suit alleges.

It asked for the removal of many members of Congress and Biden, and the swearing in of former President Donald Trump.

The alleged fraud was said to be, in part, the switching of election laws ahead of the election that made it easier to vote by mail and, in some cases, extended the deadline for receipt of such ballots, the denial of investigations into claims, and Big Tech censorship of fraud allegations.

Three courts have rejected the case, which was moved to the federal system, so far. U.S. District Judge Jill Parrish, an Obama appointee, agreed with recommendations from U.S. Magistrate Judge Jared Bennett, appointed by other judges, that Brunson lacked standing to bring the suit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed. And by turning down a writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court upheld the ruling.

Though Raland Brunson is the only petitioner named in the case, he has been helped by his brothers, with Deron Brunson taking credit for laying out many of the arguments.

‘Pretty Confident’

Deron Brunson said the family remains confident, as they expected the lower courts to rule against them. They were disappointed that the first bid to the Supreme Court didn’t work, but are taking advantage of the rules that now allow a petition for hearing.

Justices “like to look at something that’s substantial, or very controlling,” Deron Brunson told The Epoch Times. The petition will focus on key questions such as whether a rigged election is an act of war, whether members of Congress failed to abide by their oath when certifying the 2020 election without investigating reports of election fraud, and whether the oath of office is binding, or whether some form of punishment—such as whether the Supreme Court can remove members—can be imposed.

“It’s a first impression, so we’re hoping the Supreme Court will say, ‘yeah, we want to address that,’” Deron Brunson said.

“We’re giving them a chance to write out a lot about this, that will affect America forever.”

Improved Position

The writ of certiorari, or request to review the lower court decisions, “may not have been strong enough,” Deron Brunson acknowledged. “So I’m making it strong enough, to put the questions to them.”

“We’re hoping this will catch their attention, and it should,” he added.

Addressing the ideal end results of the case, the Utah man said that Biden would be removed if the election were determined to have been rigged, and Trump would be inaugurated because in general, in elections where fraud is found, the position “goes to the next person who would have won.”

That would be “very, very exciting,” Deron Brunson said. The case “would go down in history” and “build a legacy for Supreme Court justices.”

Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said justices won’t accept the petition for rehearing, pointing to how U.S. lawyers waived their right to file an argument with the court and how no justices asked them for a response.

“There is a 0% chance that a petition for reconsideration will be successful. Not 0.1%; not 0.01%; not 0.001%—0,” Vladeck wrote on Twitter.

Not All Members

The suit doesn’t name all members of Congress in power at the time of the certification. Members like Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who outlined allegations of fraud from state Sen. Kelly Townsend, were excluded, along with other members who supported investigating the allegations.

Since the case was filed, another election has come and gone. New members were sworn into office in January.

Those members would not be removed, Deron Brunson said. They “won’t be touched,” he said.