The U.S. Supreme Court determined Monday it will not hear a 2020 election lawsuit aimed at removing President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
According to court records, the lawsuit — filed by the Utah-based Raland Brunson and his brothers — sought to penalize Biden, Harris, former Vice President Mike Pence, and hundreds of lawmakers who allegedly violated their oaths of office in refusing to investigate allegations of fraud in the 2020 election.
The state-by-state tallies of electoral votes were certified in January 2021. Biden defeated then-President Donald Trump by a 306-232 count the previous November.
On Friday, the Supreme Court justices pondered informal arguments of whether the 2020 election lawsuit should be heard. On Monday, the case failed to garner four of the nine justice votes for being heard.
Shortly thereafter on Monday, Brunson provided an update post on Facebook, saying the case's "petition was denied," before adding, "we will now make our next move. A petition for reconsideration. Hang in there everyone."
Last week, Brunson suggested a rejection of his petition would occur. He then added: "Now, don't think for a second that my brothers and I are not prepared for a denial. We've got plenty of chess pieces still at play and we still have our queen."
Brunson didn't have much success with his lawsuit framework in the lower court. Also last year, the U.S. solicitor general opted to waive the government's right to respond to the matter — perhaps signaling a lack of interest for other courts hearing the case, according to the Washington Examiner.
"This was a frivolous lawsuit that never came within a light year of actually getting the court's attention," said Stephen Vladeck, a CNN legal analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.
Vladeck was also critical of Brunson for allegedly including "inaccuracies" with his case updates on social platforms.
For example, in a Substack post from December, Vladeck said Brunson claimed that former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Republican, wrote about the Supreme Court justices agreeing "to a hearing."
However, Huckabee merely stated the justices were only discussing if the case warranted a formal hearing, the Examiner reports.
"The only reason why it was on anyone's radar is because former Gov. Huckabee claimed that there was some deep substantive significance in the fact that the justices were considering it at their Jan. 6 conference," Vladeck said.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.