As the current election carries on and people across the globe watch closely to who wins the electoral college, many legal claims have been made by President Donald Trump and his team in order to hopefully shift the election in his favor. Currently, Democrat Joe Biden is projected to win the presidency after his success in Wisconsin and Michigan and his gains in Georgia and Pennsylvania.

The Trump Team has filed ​lawsuits​ in five different states, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Nevada because of a variety of claims ranging from alleged voter fraud to a lack of transparency with counting votes. As a result of Trump shifting the battle from the voters to the courts, the argument has arisen: Is Trump attempting to steal the election in the courts?

Saying that Trump is planning to steal the election through the courts is a rhetorical notion that should be taken with a grain of salt. Using the term “steal” or any synonym would imply that Trump is working through nefarious or illegal means. Using the judicial branch to determine the legitimacy of an election is a legal and fair way to go about challenging an election.

Similar action was brought up in the ​Bush-Gore election​ where lawsuits in Florida were filed. The gap between Al Gore and George W. Bush had closed 0.01 percent and Florida state law requires a recount at a gap of 0.5 percent. Arguments ensued over “hanging chads” (paper ballots with incomplete hole punchings), “pregnant chads” (paper ballots imprinted instead of pierced), “over votes” (ballots that counted for multiple votes instead of just one), and “under votes” (ballots that recorded no vote), all of which fall under the counting process. Specifically “under votes” were ruled to be recounted manually by the Florida Supreme Court for counties that reported significant amounts of said “under votes.”

Eventually, the case rose to the Supreme Court and it was ruled in favor of Bush that the countings must stop. Requests for recounts in ballot validity in the Bush-Gore case share similarities with challenging ballot validity in the current election results, except the results in these multiple states do not share the same voter gap as the 2000 election did in Florida.

Although the reasons behind why the lawsuits were filed differ from Trump’s current lawsuits, the idea of using the courts as a means of challenging election results still stands.

Using the courts to clarify election results is fully constitutional and ought to be encouraged in contested elections. In the case of this year’s election, the results of any court hearing will strengthen our democratic republic, rather than “​subvert the democratic process​” as Gov. Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania suggests.

It makes no sense to suggest that making sure every ballot is determined legitimate and legal by a court is a negative process. In fact, it would only increase trust and confidence in our country’s system of checks and balances.

If Trump loses his legal battles and the results of the election are determined as valid, then Trump will be replaced by Biden on Inauguration Day and the country will continue as it usually does with a shift in power.

If Trump wins his legal battle, then a whole can of worms will be opened. Some say that if there is any evidence of ballot manipulation in these states, then recounts will be required by observed officials to determine the actual results. In this scenario, it does not necessarily mean Trump takes the White House. It would most likely result in a change in one state rather than the general election, and that people who were proven to have manipulated election numbers will be prosecuted.

The chance that Trump wins the presidency through the courts would require a substantial pool of votes being invalidated, but we will not officially know until investigations are held.

Understandably, people want the election to be over. It has been a grueling experience so far as we have been waiting for votes to be counted longer than we expected, but we cannot dismiss any negative claim towards the election results without investigations and results within the judicial system. If we truly care about clean and accurate elections, then we have to be patient and wait for the system to play itself out instead of criticize actions taken to ensure legitimacy.

Remember, an election is a temporary but important event, but our democratic institutions are permanent, and we must fight to preserve integrity in those systems.

Currently, Trump’s lawsuits are garnering mixed results in each of the five states he has filed in, but that is not to say that he won’t take it to the Supreme Court, possibly extending election results into December.