After receiving the briefs and opposition from the four key battleground states Thursday, the next step by the Supreme Court will be to review whether to take a case as "a trial court," John Eastman, counsel to President Donald Trump and presidential scholar, said Thursday on Newsmax TV.
And the pressure on the high court to take that step is growing, he said.
"I suspect the Supreme Court is going to meet in conference [Friday] to decide whether to grant Texas' motion to file the original action," Eastman told Thursday's "Greg Kelly Reports." "And then they'll confront the issue like President Trump's motion to intervene.
"If they grant that Texas motion, they'll set a briefing schedule. They could even appoint a special master to look at some of underlying allegations of fraud."
With original jurisdiction in a dispute between states in Texas v. Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court would take the unique role as "trial court," Eastman told host Greg Kelly.
"It's not their normal role," he continued. "Normally they'll end of appointing a trial judge to serve as a special master to try and sort through the evidentiary issues."
Eastman said the pressure for the Court to take the case is mounting.
"With 18 states now and the president of the United States himself, the press to exercise whatever discretion they have to take the case, and hear it, is extremely strong," he said.
Additionally, some 106 Republican members of the House have signed on to a brief in support of the filing by Texas' attorney general, Ken Paxton.
The Texas lawsuit does not make specific fraud allegations. Instead, Texas said changes to voting procedures removed protections against fraud and were unlawful when the reforms were made by officials in the four states or courts without the approval of the states' legislatures.
Democrats and the Joe Biden campaign should welcome the legal review to legitimize the election and the next president, Eastman added.
"I think both sides ought to want to have this resolved," he said. "Half the country thinks this election was stolen, including, according to [pollster] Rasmussen, 30% of Democrats. If that's true, why would even the Biden camp not want to actually have a court look at the data, look at the violations of state law that occurred to loosen the fraud risk protections on absentee ballots.
"What would they not want to get this cleared up? So if they do win the election after a fair review, they could come in as a more legitimate president."
Eastman noted the principal legal issue is states violated or ignored their own state election laws.
"The legislature of the states has the sole authority under the federal Constitution," he continued. "Those actions by state elections officials were just patently unconstitutional."
Democrat-led states might come out against the 18 states joining Paxton's bill of complaint, but Eastman noted that will only help to spur the Supreme Court to ultimately take the case.
"It does highlight to the Supreme Court how important this case is and how important and necessary it is that it be resolved in a way that the country can think it was fairly decided," he concluded. "Right now the country doesn't think that."
Reuters contributed to this report.
Important: See Newsmax TV now carried in 70 million cable homes, on DirecTV Ch. 349, Dish Network Ch. 216, Xfinity Ch. 1115, Spectrum, U-verse Ch. 1220, FiOS Ch. 615, Optimum Ch. 102, Cox cable, Suddenlink Ch. 102, CenturyLink 1209, Mediacom Ch. 277, Frontier 615 or Find More Cable Systems – Click Here.
Eric Mack ✉
Eric Mack has been a writer and editor at Newsmax since 2016. He is a 1998 Syracuse University journalism graduate and a New York Press Association award-winning writer.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.