The web Browser you are currently using is unsupported, and some features of this site may not work as intended. Please update to a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Edge to experience all features Michigan.gov has to offer.
AG Nessel's Office Files Response with SCOTUS in Last Standing Lawsuit That Seeks to Overturn Election Results
January 15, 2021
LANSING – Even after Congress has certified the Electoral College’s votes, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office continues to defend against the baseless claims of widespread fraud in Michigan’s Nov. 3 presidential election.
The Michigan Department of Attorney General on Thursday filed a response to a petition in the U.S. Supreme Court for the case King, et al v Whitmer, et al (20-815).
In this case, the plaintiffs made the same litany of claims of fraud and irregularities in Michigan’s election that failed to persuade state courts, including the Michigan Supreme Court.
A request to enjoin state officials and overturn the results of Michigan’s presidential election was then made to federal Judge Linda Parker, of the U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan, who saw through the plaintiffs’ allegations and tenuous legal claims and denied their unprecedented request.
The plaintiffs have now asked the U.S. Supreme Court to grant the same relief, with the Attorney General’s office filing its response Thursday.
“Congress has spoken and the presidential election is over. There is no relief that can be granted and the plaintiffs’ appeal to the highest court in the country is moot,” Nessel said. “The plaintiffs and their legal counsel know this to be true, but did not dismiss their petition, requiring the filing of yet another brief by my office to defend Michigan and the will of its people. We will be pursuing sanctions against these plaintiffs and their counsel.”
It is likely plaintiffs’ petition will be rejected, especially as they are now attempting to have the underlying case dismissed, doing so only hours after the Attorney General’s office filed its brief.
Countless allegations of widespread fraud in the November general election have been made with no proof to support those claims. Courts and judges – both state and federal – have dismissed the cases that sought to undermine the results of the election, due to the inability of plaintiffs to prove their claims.