After the election, in which an unprecedented number of irregularities occurred, Texas (and several other states) petitioned the Supreme Court to adjudicate the issues. But the court ruled that since the irregularities hadn’t occurred in Texas, citizens of Texas were not harmed, and the state therefore lacked standing to file suit.
The author of this piece apparently has no comprehension of how elections — especially presidential elections — are designed to work. The LAST thing anyone writing for a conservative publication should be calling for is Federal courts exercising authority over elections across the nation.
We have seen that in the past, when the furor over “civil rights” and voter discrimination led the courts to oversee congressional districting within states. No evidence it ever helped anything, but gave a lot of shysters job security and protected some democrat congressmen.
I think you are mis-reading this.
The author is not advocating for federalization of elections the way I read it.
The way I read it is the author is making the very valid point that people from these states have legal battles regarding election law and the content of the cases bears on the constitutionality of the components of those battles, and he asserts (rightly, IMO) that the Supreme Court abdicated their responsibility by NOT getting involved.
You are reading this wrong, they are calling for the courts to mandate that state election laws be followed.
The courts allowed election laws to be ignored because “covid”. That was where things went wrong. If the laws on the books had been followed Trump would have won.