Chip Roy (R-TX) spoke up Sunday to object to the seating of colleagues from 6 states. He says that if they truly believe the Presidential election was ‘rigged,’ and they won their own seats by votes on the same ballots, then surely their wins must be questioned as well.
According to the Austin-American Statesman, Roy has been speaking out about the efforts by Donald Trump and his supporters to overturn Joe Biden’s win for some time now. He called one lawsuit, which the Supreme Court refused to touch, a “dangerous violation of federalism.”
He showed his consistent stance on the Congressional floor Sunday, objecting to the seating of Representatives for Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — a total of 67 Representatives. He released a public statement explaining why he did so.
Today, I objected to the seating of my colleagues from six states: AZ, GA, MI, NV, PA, and WI.
It would confound reason if the presidential results of these states were to face objection while the congressional results of the same process escaped public scrutiny. pic.twitter.com/VzmafDSsT7
— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) January 3, 2021
“It would confound reason if the presidential results of these states were to face objection while the congressional results of the same process escaped public scrutiny.”
Roy had also joined Representatives Ken Buck (R-CO), Kelly Armstrong (R-ND), Mike Gallagher (R-WI), Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Tom McClintock (R-CA) in issuing a statement explaining that they find it unconstitutional for Congress to try to take on the role of selecting electors. They agree that states have the authority to select electors, and that the role of Congress is to count the electoral votes, “not to determine which electors the states should have sent.”
Addressing this in his own statement, Roy says that it is, however, the role of Congress to make similar determinations regarding its own members.
“While the Constitution and the 12th Amendment do not make Congress the judge of the states’ presidential electors, it does require us to be the arbiters of the elections to this body. If the electors for the office of the president were not in question, neither would be the election certificates of my colleagues present here today.”
What's Your Reaction?
Steph Bazzle reports on social issues and religion for Hill Reporter. She focuses on stories that speak to everyone's right to practice what they believe in and receive the support of their communities and government officials. You can reach her at Steph@HillReporter.com