Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson pushed back against CBS host Margaret Brennan after being called an “election denier” Sunday for his previous amicus brief in 2020.
Johnson appeared on “Face The Nation” to discuss Congress’ goals for 2024 as well as the upcoming elections. During the interview, Brennan brought up Johnson’s support for former President Trump, mentioning his role in filing a lawsuit claiming the Constitution was violated during the 2020 election.
Brennan questioned the House speaker on his previous push for the brief, notifying him that by “CBS editorial standards” he was considered an “election denier.” Johnson immediately pushed back against the claim, stating it was “nonsense” and asking Brennan if she “read the brief.” (RELATED: ‘We’re Completely Overrun’: House Speaker Mike Johnson Describes Conditions At ‘Epicenter’ Of Border Crisis)
“You were the lawmaker who circulated the legal brief, known as the Texas amicus brief, challenging the 2020 election outcome in a number of states — which, by CBS editorial standards, makes you an election denier,” Brennan stated.
“That’s nonsense,” Johnson stated.
“Can I get you on the record on that?” Brennan questioned.
“I’ve always been consistent on the record. Did you read the brief? Did you get a chance to read what we filed to the Supreme Court?” Johnson asked.
Brennan responded by stating she had “extensively” read “some criticisms” of the brief, to which Johnson pointed out she had only read “commentary” and not what was “submitted to the Court.” The CBS host, however, then pivoted back to asking Johnson if he recognizes President Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 election.
Johnson continued to state that while Biden was “certified” as the “winner,” the argument presented by the lawsuit was simply claiming the Constitution had been “violated” through last-minute electoral changes. (RELATED: Congress Unlikely To Pass All Appropriations Bills Before Next Government Funding Deadline In 2024, Experts Say)
“But you recognize that President Biden won the 2020 election? Can you just put that aside as an issue?” Brennan questioned.
“President Biden was certified as the winner of the election. He took the oath of office, he’s been the president for three years. The argument that we presented to the Court — which is our only avenue to do so — was that the Constitution was clearly violated in the 2020 election — it’s Article 2, Section 1 — and anyone can Google it and read it for themselves. The system by which you choose electors to elect the president of the United States must be done by the individual states and the system must be ratified by the state legislatures. That is plain language out of the Constitution,” Johnson stated.
“So you still have issues with the validity of the 2020 election?” Brennan asked.
“The Constitution was violated in the run up to the 2020 election — not always in bad faith, but in the aftermath of COVID many states changed their election laws in ways that violated that plain language — that’s just a fact. We presented that argument and those facts to the Court and it was never directly addressed because of the Texas litigation. But that was the only vehicle we had to present that issue squarely to the Court,” Johnson stated.
“It was completely shut down as an issue,” Brennan quickly responded.
Johnson previously served as the Republican Study Committee chair when he introduced an amicus brief which supported a Texas lawsuit challenging the 2020 election results in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, according to The Hill. What later became known as the “Texas amicus brief,” the lawsuit eventually garnered support from more than 100 House Republicans.
The lawsuit claimed that according to Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, the presidential electors are to “be appointed in a manner directed by the state.” However, in the months prior to the 2020 election the “rules” were “deliberately changed” by “both state and non-state actors,” the lawsuit claimed.
The U.S. Supreme Court eventually threw out the brief in December 2020, stating it lacked standing to have been brought forward, according to the Texas Tribune.