Various media outlets have been reporting on the notoriety and expansiveness of State of Texas vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, etc.. This lawsuit alleges the following:
• Non-legislative actors’ purported amendments to States’ duly enacted election laws, in violation of the Electors Clause’s vesting State legislatures with plenary authority regarding the appointment of presidential electors.
• Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters, with more favorable allotted to voters – whether lawful or unlawful – in areas administered by local government under Democrat control and with populations with higher ratios of Democrat voters than other areas of Defendant States.
• The appearance of voting irregularities in the Defendant States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States' election laws
While the Supreme Court does have original jurisdiction over suits between two or more states, this suit seems to state that the way other states allegedly failed to follow their own state law in turn led to these states not following federal law. There do exist cases where the Supreme Court invalidates certain state laws, but I do not see a successful case where a state invalidates another state's law on the basis of the other state's law violating the U.S. constitution. Rather the cases I cited with two or more states seem to be with contractual disputes as opposed to one state saying that another state's law is wrong. This leads me to question...
Can one state appeal a suit to the supreme court about the validity of a different states' state law in relation to the federal constitution?