Cruz explains why he agreed to argue Pa. election case if Supreme Court takes it up

close

Video

Cruz: I agreed to argue Pa. election case because US needs 'resolution'

Senate Judiciary Committee Republican talks to 'Hannity' about key election lawsuit over no-excuse vote-by-mail

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told "Hannity" Monday that he agreed to present oral arguments before the Supreme Court in a key election-related case -- should the high court take the matter up -- because the matter "raises very serious issues."

The case brought by Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., and Pennsylvania GOP congressional candidate Sean Parnell, alleges that a 2019 state law allowing no-excuse mail-in voting is unconstitutional. If the court agrees, according to KDKA, Kelly and Parnell said most of the commonwealth's mail-in votes in this past presidential election could be thrown out.

Kelly and Parnell were initially granted a stay by Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Patricia McCullough, but Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf's administration summarily filed an appeal with the State Supreme Court; a 5-2 Democratic majority. The higher court sided with Wolf, and Kelly's team moved to get the U.S. Supreme Court to rule.

The plaintiffs argue that the state does not have grounds to allow non-absentee vote-by-mail without a constitutional amendment. Nearly 30 Republican members of the state legislature have signed a document in amicus with Kelly and Parnell's case.

ALITO MOVES UP PENNSYLVANIA'S RESPONSE DATE ON EMERGENCY APPLICATION TO DAY BEFORE SAFE HARBOR DEADLINE

"We supported passage of Act 77 because we believed every Pennsylvanian should have more opportunities to participate in our democratic process," State Sen. Judy Ward, R-Blair, and State Rep. Paul Schemel, R-Franklin, said in a joint statement Monday.

"The legislation was carefully drafted to protect the integrity of our elections and included specific provisions relating to deadlines and signature verification," they continued, adding that the State Supreme Court later "overrule[d] the will of the legislature and governor by changing deadlines and eliminating provisions requiring signature verification, thereby applying much looser standards to mail-in ballots than are applied to ballots cast in person."

"It raises pure issues of law, and I believe the Supreme Court should choose to take the case," Cruz told host Sean Hannity. "I think they should hear the appeal."

WARNOCK AGAIN DODGES COURT-PACKING QUESTION IN GEORGIA SENATE RUNOFF RACE

The Senate Judiciary Committee member added that "at a time when this country is so divided, when people are so angry, I think we need a sense of resolution, and we need the Supreme Court to step in and ensure that we're following the Constitution and following the law.

"Right now, it is not healthy for democracy, what we're seeing, and in Pennsylvania, the problem was made worse because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is a partisan Democratic court that issued multiple decisions just on their face contrary to the law," Cruz went on. "That's not how elections are supposed to work."

Cruz noted that the U.S. Supreme Court feels the "urgency" of the moment, given the upcoming "safe harbor" deadline for selecting electors.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"We will have a response and we could have a decision as early as tomorrow from the Supreme Court whether or not they will take the case," he said. 

"When you look at a country where 39% of Americans right now believe this last election was rigged, that's a real problem for confidence in the integrity of our electoral system," the senator concluded. "So, I'm hopeful the Supreme Court will step forward to its responsibility and resolve this case and resolve other cases as needed."