Courts refused to look at the evidence of 2020 election fraud
| Courts refused to look at the evidence of 2020 election fraud | |
|---|---|
| FALSE | |
| "Judges threw out the 2020 cases on technicalities without reviewing any evidence." | |
| Domain | Politics & Elections |
| Tactic | False Context Conspiracy Theory |
| Era | Current |
| First seen | 2020 |
| Origin | Statements by campaign lawyers and allies after the 2020 losses |
| Last reviewed | 2026-11-03 |
| Further reading: books on Politics & Elections | |
The claim that courts refused to look at the evidence of 2020 election fraud conflates rulings on standing with rulings on the merits.
What the evidence shows
- Many rulings were on the merits. Judges in several states examined the arguments and evidence and found them lacking.
- Judges of both parties. Judges appointed by presidents of both parties, including Trump appointees such as Judge Stephanos Bibas of the Third Circuit, rejected the campaign's claims.
- Volume. By early December 2020, an AP count found that more than 35 of about 50 suits had been dismissed or dropped.
- Lack of evidence. Courts repeatedly noted that the campaign offered allegations rather than proof of fraud.
Why it persists
Some suits did fail on procedural grounds, which is easily generalized to all of them.
Lessons for readers
- "Dismissed" can mean several different things. Read what the judge actually wrote.
See also
Sources
- Associated Press tally of 2020 election lawsuits.
- Court opinions in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and Georgia cases.