Letters

Despite the final resolution of the 2020 presidential election by way of the formal vote of the Electoral College, I believe it is important to point out that District 1 U.S. Representative Lee Zeldin opted to join with 125 other Republican congressmen and sign an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit filed by the State of Texas meant to throw out results in four battleground states and thus try to overturn the national election.

A few days later, the U.S. Supreme Court, recently bolstered by Republican-added justices, determined that the Texas lawsuit lacked standing and that it “has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections.”

For many of us less familiar with judicial language, the short interpretation is that the Texas lawsuit was deemed as frivolous. The decision to support such a lawsuit that lacks credible supportive evidence or standing seems undemocratic to me.

I think Representative Zeldin owes his constituents an explanation for his thinking about this matter. What evidence did he base his decision on to try to overturn certified state election results?

John Wickersham

Sag Harbor