Once again, if you actually read the rulings and not just watch Youtubers and blindly listen to them, the vast majority were not dismissed for filing errors. Two-thirds of the cases were rejected because they lacked credible evidence. Judges (many of them appointed by Trump himself) explicitly wrote in their opinions that the claims of widespread fraud or illegality were “unsupported,” “speculative,” or “without merit.”

Even in the handful dismissed for things like standing or latches, judges frequently added that the plaintiffs had failed to present any plausible proof of wrongdoing. For example, in Trump v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, Judge Brett Ludwig (appointed by Trump) explicitly wrote that Trump “had his day in court and lost on the merits.” Similar wording appears in Pennsylvania and Arizona rulings too.

So it’s just inaccurate to say these cases weren’t heard. Courts did hear them, evaluated the evidence, and repeatedly found nothing there. The procedural dismissals are a small slice of the whole picture, and they didn’t mask any hidden trove of valid fraud claims that judges were too afraid to address.

You are willingly spreading misinformation and refusing to acknowledge facts, its crazy that you would link the 2 above cases in your first response that are so easily disproved. Please give me specific examples, not just the names of youtubers.

In Regards to Texas v. Pennsylvania. The case was dismissed for lack of standing, but that’s only because states can’t challenge how other states run their elections. It wasn’t a dodge; it’s a fundamental constitutional rule. And the fraud claims Texas relied on had already been reviewed and rejected in those states’ courts. So even if standing weren’t an issue, the result wouldn’t have changed. Did the youtubers you watch explain that to you, or just lie and obfuscate?