Texas, with the support of 17 other states, had just filed a lawsuit to seek the SCOTUS to invalidate the election results in four battleground states. Mainstream media describe this as a moon-shot attempt to overturn the election result. If you just look at this lawsuit at face value, calculate the probability of it succeeding, then it is easy to conclude that nothing will change and Joe Biden will be inaugurated as President next month. But I think there is more to this than just to overturn the election result.
As Dinesh D’Souza explained, it is striking that this lawsuit does not aim prove the allegation of election fraud. Instead, as Dinesh explained,
The Texas lawsuit before SCOTUS is based on the idea that the Constitution is a pact among the states, and no state the right to unlawfully change the rules of a national election.
To cut his explanation short, Texas is arguing that the swing states is engaging in legal conduct that is unconstitutional.
At face value, it seems that Texas is seeking to overturn the election result by invalidating the electoral college votes of these swing states, thereby granting the presidency to Trump. The mainstream media is right to see that the probability of the lawsuit succeeding is extremely slim. But to win is not the point of the lawsuit (although winning should be seen as a bonus outcome).
So, what is the real purpose of this lawsuit?
If you see the Constitution as a pact among the states to define the union, then what if some states break the pact? Then other states have no obligation to remain in the union. In other words, other states have the right to secede from the union!
The SCOTUS is in a bind. If it rules in favour of Texas, then Trump will be the President. If it rules against (or made no ruling at all), then it paves the way for Red states to secede from the ‘United’ States.
In the past, secession is a desire by fringe minority groups. But today, given that the election result does not command an air of legitimacy by the majority of voters on the losing side, it is no longer a fringe view anymore. In fact, as this article reported,
“I definitely see a brand new movement taking shape,” said Monica Boyer, a former lobbyist in Indiana and early national voice of the tea party movement. “Was this election stolen? I don’t know. But people have the right to know.”
There is a high chance that this brand new movement will advocate for secession. Many people see that the USA is on the verge of a civil war. On one side, we have the conservatives who want to preserve the originality of the United States. On the other side, we have the leftists and liberals who want to the United States to move on from what it originally was, even to the point of repudiating its original Constitution and change the fundamental origins of what defines the country. Both sides are irreconcilable. In this context, secession is less bad than civil war. It will be the lesser of two evils.
So, it is possible that we will soon see the breakup of the United States, just as the Soviet Union broke up a few decades ago.