Jeffrey Epstein’s former lawyer insists the Supreme Court could still hand Trump the presidency

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who once worked on Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein’s legal defence teams, has pushed Trump’s theory that the US Supreme Court could still overturn the results of the 2020 election.

In an interview with former Fox News reporter John Solomon, Dershowitz claimed that the Trump campaign’s efforts to prevent states from certifying their election results could somehow end up reaching the Supreme Court which he believes would rule in the president’s favour.

This theory has been widely disputed by legal experts. But nevertheless, he said:

The clock is a double-edged sword in this election because if they don’t have enough time but if they can put forward a sufficiently strong case then they may be able to get some Republican Secretaries of States or legislatures to say, ‘Look, we just don’t have enough time to certify these electors’ and if they can bring down the number of electors, 35 [to] 37, from the 305 and bring it down to 267 or 268 then the election goes to the House, where the Republicans win.

He continued:

If that happens, then yes, it will go to the Supreme Court.

I think at least under the Constitutional challenge, the Article 2 challenge in Pennsylvania, they have a pretty good chance of winning.

The idea seems to be to prolong legal challenges and delay certification of the vote in enough states past the “safe harbor” deadline. This 8 December cut-off is the deadline for final resolution of all election disputes, including court challenges.

If things aren’t settled by then, Congress has the authority to determine victor in states that haven’t certified their results.

These comments come after the Trump campaign’s efforts to overturn the election results were hit by more legal setbacks. Rudy Giuliani’s performance was described as “sad” and “desperate”.

Dershowitz clarified that in order for these cases to reach the Supreme Court, Trump’s campaign would either have to show that the disputed ballots would exceed the difference between the winning margin and losing margin or provide “hard evidence” of voting irregularities or fraud.

Both of which are very unlikely given Biden has a significant lead in Pensylvania and only around 10,000 posal ballots arrived after election day in the state, according to officials. And so far there has been no evidence of widespread voter fraud anywhere in America.

So it’s not entirely clear what issue Dershowitz thinks may reach the high court, seeing as this appears to invalidate his prior suggestion.

In the meantime, Trump’s legal campaign has reportedly been possessed by infighting as the chances of any credible challenge to the result get smaller.

Please log in or register to upvote this article
The Conversation (0)