A Trump-appointed judge eviscerated the US president's election lawsuit in Pennsylvania
- A Pennsylvania appeals court rejected the Trump campaign's effort to block a lower court ruling that said the campaign cannot block the state from certifying its election results.
- Judge Stephanos Bibas, who wrote the ruling for the three-judge appeals court panel, is a Trump appointee and did not mince words when rejecting the incumbent US president's campaign's appeal.
- "Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here," Bibas wrote.
- "The Campaign's claims have no merit."
- Visit Business Insider SA's homepage for more stories.
A Pennsylvania appeals court on Friday decisively rejected the Trump campaign's request to block a lower court ruling that dismissed the campaign's effort to block Pennsylvania from certifying its election results.
Notably, the judge who wrote the appeals court's decision, Stephanos Bibas, was appointed to the panel by US President Donald Trump.
"Charges of unfairness are serious," Bibas wrote in Friday's ruling. "But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
"The Campaign's claims have no merit," he added.
The Trump campaign's Pennsylvania lawsuit is its biggest legal challenge related to the 2020 election. In the case, Trump's campaign sued seven Democratic counties over vague allegations of voter fraud and asked that a judge block the state from certifying its election results for President-elect Joe Biden.
However, the two instances of voter fraud Trump's legal team singled out in the case did not take place in any of the counties it sued and instead occurred in Fayette and Luzerne counties, both of which overwhelmingly voted for Trump and were not named as defendants.
Trump's lead defense lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, also made unspecified and baseless claims about "widespread nationwide voter fraud" when arguing the case before the a Pennsylvania district court that were not supported by the campaign's lawsuit. As a result, US District Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the lawsuit.
The campaign subsequently appealed Brann's decision to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which in a 3-0 decision rejected the appeal and tore apart the president's legal team's arguments.