Supreme Court sides with Democrats in Pennsylvania voting case

Editor's note: This makes sense. The ballots, as stated in the article, were not even accepted by the clerk's office.  So, it was if the voter hadn't voted.  Once notified that their ballots had not been counted why wouldn't the board of electors allow them to vote. 

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday left in place a lower court ruling that for now allows Pennsylvania voters to cast provisional ballots if their mail-in ballots have been invalidated.

Since 2019, all Pennsylvania voters have been able to cast ballots by mail, but to have their mail ballots counted, they have to follow strict rules laid out in the state election code. One of those rules requires voters to place their ballot into a “secrecy envelope” before placing it into the mailing envelope. Without the secrecy envelope, the ballot is considered “naked” and will not be counted.

Under a state-wide notification system, voters get an email telling them that their naked ballot has been invalidated and that “you can go to your polling place on election day and cast a provisional ballot.” Most counties follow that practice, but some, like Butler County, Pa., do not.

After two voters in the 2024 primary election were notified that their ballots would not be counted because they had not put their ballots in the secrecy envelope, the voters went to the polls on Election Day to cast provisional ballots. But Butler County refused to count their votes.

The voters sued, arguing that the Board of Elections was obligated to count their provisional ballots. The Republican National Committee and the Butler County Board of Elections countered that under the state election code provisional ballots cast by those whose mail ballots were received on time cannot be counted, even if the mail ballots were deemed invalid.

In a 4-3 decision, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court sided with the voters. The court determined that a naked ballot is automatically void, meaning it was never received or counted by the Board of Elections. Under that logic, if the ballot was never received, a voter is eligible to cast a provisional ballot.

The Pennsylvania Republican Party and the RNC appealed to the U.S Supreme Court to block the decision. They argued that the state supreme court's decision "dramatically change[d] the rules governing mail voting" and usurped the state legislature's role of regulating federal elections.

On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to intervene, leaving in place the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that allows provisional votes to be cast and counted when a “naked” mail-in ballot is invalidated.

It’s hard to say how many ballots the high court decision will affect or whether it will ultimately impact the outcome of the Presidential election. The RNC estimates it could affect tens of thousands of voters. Other election experts say the number is likely far lower. Regardless of the number, Pennsylvania is sure to be a key state on election day and depending on how close the race is between Vice President Harris and former-President Donald Trump, the decision could be critical in deciding the presidency.

By Nina Totenberg, Ilana Dutton, NPR, November 1, 2024 

Posted by Blue Patriot November 2, 2024


Posted by Blue Patriot and other sources

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

115 Years of War Since 1900 for America

Since 1900, the United States has been at war or engaged in major military conflicts for roughly 100 to 115 years. A few nations have participated in more conflicts, but that does not diminish the extraordinary amount of resources the United States has devoted to warfare over this period. These estimates come from reliable sources, including the Library of Congress and other authoritative conflict records. Some of these wars can be argued as justified. In my view, World War II, the Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan had legitimate grounds to some degree. Yet many other conflicts might have been resolved peacefully—or avoided entirely—had different choices been made. This does not mean the United States, or any nation, should retreat into isolationism. Global problems require global participation. When a nation removes itself from the table, it leaves space for authoritarian actors or non‑state armed groups to step in and shape outcomes. Beyond material costs, many sources estim...
Read more

Immigrants are Not Committing More Crime

Editor Notes:  Are we truly focused on reducing crime, addressing immigration, or simply stoking fear? If the goal is to lower crime rates, then the attention should be on those statistically committing more offenses—native-born citizens—rather than scapegoating immigrants. ( Link ) If opposition to immigration is the stance, that's understandable, even if I don’t personally agree with it. However, that position can be argued without fueling fear across entire immigrant communities.  The reality is that the GOP, under Trump’s dominant influence, relies on fear-mongering as a political strategy. They see it as a tool to mobilize voters and maintain their grip on power. Fear can be effective in driving political engagement, but it comes at the cost of facts, fairness, and a more constructive dialogue on crime, immigration and damage to due process.   No, immigrants aren't more likely to commit crimes than US-born, despite Trump's border speech Published 11:26 a.m. ET...
Read more

Grievance with Trump and the Republican Party

The follow is my list of the grievances I have with President Trump and the Republican party.  1. Executive Overreach President Trump has asserted direct control over areas traditionally and constitutionally reserved for Congress. He uses executive orders as de facto legislation, directing agencies to implement the President’s personal agenda and not an agenda that is beneficial for the country. This expansion of unilateral authority bypasses the legislative process and weakens the separation of powers. 2. Failure of Congressional Oversight Congress has not exercised adequate oversight of the executive branch, enabling expansions of presidential authority in emergency powers, tariffs, immigration, and the use of acting officials. This neglect weakens the rule of law and undermines democratic accountability. 3. Misuse of National Emergency Powers The President has declared national emergencies without legitimate justification, using them to bolster executive orders rathe...
Read more