When I wrote to my Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart and told him he should be ashamed of himself for being one of the 126 Republican congressman who provided support for the Texas lawsuit trying to throw out the results of the election in 4 other states, he wrote me back:
Dear Laurence,
Thank you for your recent correspondence. I always appreciate hearing from constituents back home as it helps me better serve you in the 116th Congress.
As you may know, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution states that “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . .” The petition that Texas recently filed in the U.S. Supreme Court alleges that the states of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania usurped the authority granted to the State Legislatures of those states to set the rules for presidential elections. Because the U.S. Constitution expressly provides that only the state legislatures may set the laws for the presidential election, I joined 125 of my colleagues urging the Supreme Court to consider these alleged constitutional violations.
I believe that the amicus brief I signed raises serious questions as to whether Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution was violated. The amicus brief gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to determine the validity of this claim. Because our commitments to the democratic process and peaceful transfer of power are the cornerstones of American society, I believe it is critical to resolve these constitutional concerns about the election. A ruling from the Court would bolster public confidence in the process, assuage the doubts of millions of voters, and ensure that future elections are conducted in full compliance with the Constitution. I firmly believe that all legally valid votes from eligible voters throughout the nation must be counted and given full effect, without being nullified or diluted by unconstitutionally cast votes. The amicus brief that I signed did not explore the many issues raised in President Trump’s various legal challenges. Instead, it simply asked the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether the Constitution was followed in those four states where last minute changes were made to the election process by judges, local officials, and others without the constitutional authority to do so. Without taking a position on the constitutional issues raised in the case, the Supreme Court determined that Texas did not have standing to bring suit. I accept the Court’s decision.
I have been involved in a number of different constitutional disputes over many years, including the 2000 presidential election during which flaws in Florida’s election process led to judicial review. In Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed two decisions of Florida’s Supreme Court, including one mandating a statewide recount in which each county would apply different ballot-counting rules, resulting in unequal treatment of Florida voters in violation of the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. In that election, the U.S. Supreme Court played an important role in ensuring that essential constitutional provisions were followed.
I swore under oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the amicus brief that I signed seeks to do precisely that. Our Constitution has served us well for over two hundred years by safeguarding individual rights, ensuring a separation of powers, and proscribing the means of electing our federal representatives. Especially in times of controversy and contention, it is even more important that we not abandon the foundational document that shapes our legal system.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to do so in the future, should you have any other questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Mario Diaz-Balart
Member of Congress
This is what I wrote back to him:
Dear Congressman Balart:
Congressman Balart, I received your email reply. I know you have probably answered a lot of emails like this, but truly, what you sent to me is about as 'form' a response as it gets, and not very convincing for several reasons...
The Constitution plainly says that each state shall appoint presidential electors "in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct." That in no way allows for any other state to impose its will on the right of another state to determine its own rules. In the case that you support, Texas has asked the Supreme Court to override such legislative determinations. The case you supported is therefore hostile to the liberal political system and antagonistic to the idea that the will of the people should prevail.
The Texas brief stated that Texas asserts that the Supreme Court's intervention is necessary to ensure faith in the election, but it is hard to imagine what could possibly undermine faith in democracy more than the Supreme Court permitting one state to enlist the court in its attempt to overturn the election results in other states. The Texas case attempts to disenfranchise tens of millions of voters in violation of the core principles of the Constitution.
Additionally, there’s no reason to believe the voting conducted in any of the states was done unconstitutionally; no evidence has been produced of voter fraud and consequently Trump’s post-election litigation campaign has been repeatedly laughed out of courts across the country.
At the end of the day, you have misguidedly supported an effort to disenfranchise millions of voters solely for the purpose of maintaining power at the expense of a constitutionally insured process of accepting the will of the voting electorate. Sir, that is about as anti-democratic as it gets. You have now become part of a party that has abandoned the concept of democracy and the rule of law, and has accepted autocratic means and processes to remain in power--in effect you have supported an attempt at a coup d'etat.
You are not a stupid man by any means. You know in your heart of hearts that this election was fair and secure, and you also know in your heart of hearts that there is a steady stream of falsehoods, misdirection and lies being promulgated by the Trump campaign and all it's sycophantic supporters, which now apparently includes you. It is that steady invective that is stirring up emotions amongst a major part of the electorate that voted for Trump, and is now being persuaded by those lies that Joe Biden is not a legitimate President-elect. Your actions have been cause for loss of faith in our system of government and our democratic norms.
When you lie in bed at night and stare at the ceiling and try to rationalize your support for this effort, I hope that somehow you will understand how destructive your misguided support of these anti-democratic efforts has been.
I am clear now in my understanding that because you have chosen to throw your lot in with those who reject our democracy, you have no place in the Congress of the United States.
Yours respectfully,
Laurence A. Lancit