“ESTOPPEL: The preclusion of a person from asserting a fact, by previous conduct inconsistent therewith, on his own part or the part of those under whom he claims, or by an adjudication upon his rights, which he cannot be allowed to call into question.” – page 1078, Bouvier’s Law Dictionary. Rawles’ Third Edition.
Once Arizona establishes that the Democrats gained that state’s electoral votes by fraud, momentum will likely build toward de-certifying that slate of electors. Other states may follow suit. Without a doubt, Democrats will argue that the elector certification is an accomplished act and cannot be reversed. However, Arizona may argue that as a state with residual sovereignty, there are certain cases where it is not subject to estoppel.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (1914, reprint 1984) has several pages that cite numerous cases pertaining to estoppel, in its definition of the term. Concerning states, he writes: “It has been held that a state may be estopped by deed; but there are expressions to the contrary, though generally qualified so as not to conflict with the doctrine that the state may be estopped by legislative action; but not by official laches, or error.”
– So it appears that Arizona could not have reversed the awarding of its Electors, had the agent’s vote tabulations been honest; but if the vote count is found to be fraudulent, then Arizona awarded those Electors in error; thus the state can de-certify the Democrat Electoral slate and award the honor to the GOP Electors.
Blog Editor Patrick Cloutier is the author of Mussolini’s War in the East 1941-1943.