Which specific 2020 post‑election lawsuits reached federal appellate courts or the Supreme Court, and what were their outcomes?
Executive summary
The wave of post‑Election Day litigation in 2020 produced a scattering of appeals to federal circuit courts and a handful of matters presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the federal appellate and Supreme Court outcomes were overwhelmingly adverse to efforts to overturn state results: most appeals were denied, dismissed, or summarily rejected, with a few narrow procedural orders and stays along the way [1] [2] [3]. Key named matters that reached the federal appellate level or the Supreme Court include Texas v. Pennsylvania, multiple Trump‑campaign petitions (including challenges tied to Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), Wood v. Raffensperger in Georgia, and several emergency appeals about ballot‑deadline and witness/notary rules — almost all of which failed to change certified outcomes [4] [2] [5] [6].
1. Texas v. Pennsylvania and the Supreme Court’s near‑instant rebuke
A high‑profile interstate suit — Texas v. Pennsylvania — sought to invalidate certification in four battleground states and was fast‑tracked to the Supreme Court; the Court refused to grant leave to file, effectively ending that sweeping effort and underscoring standing limits on one State suing to set aside another State’s election procedures [3] [1]. The denial exemplified the Supreme Court’s posture across many 2020 matters: willing to decline expansive election rewrites and to reject extraordinary relief that would overturn state certifications [2] [1].
2. Trump campaign petitions to the Supreme Court (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and others) — denials and narrow procedural orders
The Trump campaign and allied litigants repeatedly sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court on Pennsylvania and other state issues; most certiorari petitions were denied or dismissed, though Justice Alito briefly ordered segregation of certain late‑arriving Pennsylvania mail ballots — a narrow administrative directive that did not alter certified outcomes and was the closest the campaign obtained to a federal judicial encroachment on state counting rules [7] [2] [8]. The Court’s majority largely declined to intervene in state election administration disputes, with only isolated justices favoring review on separation‑of‑powers questions about state legislatures and state courts [2] [7].
3. Wood v. Raffensperger and appeals through the 11th Circuit to the Supreme Court
Wood v. Raffensperger began in federal district court in Georgia challenging absentee procedures and sought to block certification; it proceeded to the 11th Circuit and prompted a petition to the Supreme Court, which ultimately denied relief — the broader appellate track did not produce the relief plaintiffs sought and the denial was one of many federal appellate dead ends for post‑election claims [4] [9]. The Brennan Center and litigation trackers documented similar paths for other federal suits that reached circuit courts but failed to reverse certifications or substantively disrupt the count process [4] [9].
4. Ballot‑deadline, witness/notary and curbside voting fights that reached federal appellate courts and the Court
A constellation of disputes over witness/notary requirements, ballot receipt deadlines, and curbside voting produced emergency appeals to federal panels and the Supreme Court — for example, the North Carolina and Rhode Island contests and Merrill v. People First of Alabama were pressed up to the Supreme Court after lower federal courts and appellate courts issued conflicting or disruptive orders; the Supreme Court often stepped in to stay lower‑court changes or declined to extend extraordinary relief, preserving state certification timelines [5] [10]. Ballotpedia’s tracking shows the Court routinely acted to restrain last‑minute alterations to election rules and to leave in place either the status quo or state decisions in most instances [5].
5. Aggregate outcomes, judicial themes, and limits of the record
Comprehensive trackers and academic reviews conclude that virtually none of the post‑election suits that reached federal appeals panels or the U.S. Supreme Court succeeded in reversing state results: appeals were denied, dismissed for lack of standing or laches, or decided against plaintiffs on the merits, with only minor procedural wins that had no effect on final outcomes [6] [11] [9]. Scholars note recurring doctrines the courts invoked — standing, laches, and reluctance to rewrite state election rules close to certification — and federal appellate votes overwhelmingly rejected claims seeking to decertify or discard sufficient ballots to change the result [12] [11]. Reporting and case trackers document individual cases and denials, but sources provided here do not enumerate every federal appellate docket entry exhaustively; where the record in these sources is incomplete, no assertion beyond their reporting is attempted [4] [8].