Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin filed four separate briefs, but common themes emerged among all four. First, the states stressed, Texas’ lawsuit does not fall within the narrow category of cases in which the Supreme Court should exercise its original jurisdiction. Among other things, the states noted, there is another forum to resolve these disputes, as evidenced by the fact that courts around the country have repeatedly considered and rejected similar claims about the 2020 election. And if the Supreme Court were to exercise its original jurisdiction here, the states warned, its docket would be flooded with election-law disputes every four years in perpetuity.

Second, the states told the justices, Texas’ lawsuit is not a viable case because (again, among other things) Texas does not have a legal right to sue, known as standing, because it cannot show that it has been injured. Georgia pushed back against the argument that Texas has standing because it has an interest in the election of the vice president, who casts the deciding vote in the Senate: Texas doesn’t have a special interest in the vice president’s vote, Georgia observed, but in any event its “speculation that the Vice President may one day cast a tie-breaking vote” is not enough to support a lawsuit. Indeed, Georgia notes, during his eight years as vice president, President-elect Joe Biden never cast a tie-breaking vote.

Source: States tell justices to deny Texas request to overturn 2020 election – SCOTUSblog