Let me throw this out, explaining why I support the decision. If we open the gates to allow states to sue other states as to the defendant's state laws, how long until the gun grabber states start suing to end the freedoms of gun friendly/tolerant states? Can't you see New York and California suing all other states to enforce their own gun control agendas, citing public safety and ending the illegal flow of firearms into their own states?
The problem with that argument, counselor, is that in this case the aforementioned
state laws directly affect people and government entities (other states) outside of the states being sued. Obviously, Texas should not have any standing in questions about the election of the governor or state legislature in another state. But, when the elections in other states dictate the makeup of the federal government, and that directly impacts on Texas, then I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that Texas has standing.
Respectfully, I view this as the SCOTUS choosing a flimsy excuse as a way to avoid having to rule on the issue.
{Edit to add} It won't happen, of course, but this election makes it clear that what
should be done is to separate the election of federal officers from the election of state officers. The election mechanism for federal officers should be the same in every state, and should
at a minimum conform to the UN standards for free and fair elections.