Dershowitz: Supreme Court ruling shows 'you can't count on the judiciary' if you're Team Trump

Attorney Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzIs the Alec Baldwin shooting a homicide? Top Trump lawyer Pat Cipollone to run DC branch for Browne George Ross How to mess with Texas' anti-abortion bounty? Apply it to gun sales MORE said the Supreme Court turning down Texas’s election lawsuit sent a message that President TrumpDonald TrumpSix big off-year elections you might be missing Twitter suspends GOP Rep. Banks for misgendering trans health official Meghan McCain to Trump: 'Thanks for the publicity' MORE and his allies "can’t count on the judiciary" to help overturn the results of the election. 

“The three justices that President Trump appointed, his three justices, voted not to hear the case,” Dershowitz said during an interview with John Catsimatidis on his radio show on WABC 770 AM.  “I think it’s a message to him and his team that you can’t count on the judiciary, you can’t count on the courts.” 

Dershowitz, a contributor to The Hill, said the president and his allies needed a “perfect storm” in order to overturn the election results, which includes the help of the courts, state governors and secretaries of state. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The attorney noted that time is running out for the president to pose a successful legal bid to overturn the election results. Dershowitz added that since the courts are unlikely to rule in his favor, Trump’s recourse is state legislatures, which are “very, very unlikely” to help him.

“So I suspect on Monday we will see the electors ... elect Joe BidenJoe BidenRand Paul calls for Fauci's firing over 'lack of judgment' Dems look to keep tax on billionaires in spending bill Six big off-year elections you might be missing MORE,” Dershowitz said. “Whether you like that or you don’t like it, that’s the reality that the Trump team has to face.”

The Trump campaign and GOP allies have mounted a slew of legal battles in various swing states in an effort to challenge the 2020 election results. Since the beginning, legal experts have said that these battles are unlikely to go far. 

On Friday, the Supreme Court found that Texas did not show a “judicially cognizable” interest in how other states conduct their elections. It dismissed all other claims as “moot.”

While Justices Samuel AlitoSamuel AlitoA politicized Supreme Court? That was the point Locked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Altria - Jan. 6 panel flexes its muscle MORE and Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasA politicized Supreme Court? That was the point Locked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment Two conservatives resign from Biden's Supreme Court commission MORE wrote in a dissenting statement that the court is obligated to hear disputes between states, they agreed with the other members in siding against Texas.

ADVERTISEMENT

Friday’s ruling was the latest in a series of legal defeats by the president and his allies in an attempt to overturn Biden's win.  It came days after the Supreme Court declined to hear a similar GOP challenge targeted at Pennsylvania’s election results.

However, Trump’s personal attorney Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiLev Parnas found guilty of breaking campaign finance laws Giuliani associate Lev Parnas won't testify at trial Four Seasons Total Landscaping comes full circle with MSNBC special MORE said in a Newsmax interview that the campaign would present the case in district court.

“We’re not finished,” Giuliani said. “Believe me.”

John Catsimatidis is an investor in The Hill.