In Pennsylvania, postal ballot papers are typically due by the end of polls on election day, regardless of when they are postmarked. The state’s Supreme Court extended the state’s deadline following a democratically supported lawsuit. Citing concerns about the pandemic and coronavirus deliverability within the US Postal Service.
Republicans tried to challenge the Supreme Court decision in the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court first stuck, 4-4, In mid-October on an urgency request to block the extension of the Supreme Court. The court then declined to act again shortly before the election, but open the option on the left return after the election to make a decision. Last week, Justice Samuel Alito ordered this Ballot papers arriving late will be separated, but said they could still be counted if “counted separately”.
The 10,000 ballot papers are irrelevant to Biden’s victory in a critical battlefield condition. He currently leads with more than 47,000 votes as the state continues to count ballots. Commonwealth Secretary Kathy Boockvar announced that around 94,000 preliminary ballots were cast to voters across the state on election day. Preliminary ballot papers will be submitted when there is a question about the elector’s eligibility. Qualifications will be verified after the election and the ballot will not be counted if the voter is not eligible, so not all 94,000 ballots will be counted.
“The counties have done an impressive job of counting a record number of postal ballot papers and are now promoting the preliminary ballot papers, each of which must be viewed individually,” Democrat Boockvar said Tuesday. “Millions of Pennsylvanians voted and heard their voice in a free, fair and open election last week. I am so proud of the election officials and poll workers who worked tirelessly in the midst of a pandemic to help voters make this election. ”
Some electoral lawyers have expressed their confidence that the US Supreme Court would not ultimately throw away late-arriving Pennsylvania ballots, noting that voters at that point followed instructions from their electoral officials. But the case could instead serve as a key indicator of how future electoral litigation would play out, they said.
In this case, Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center, said, “I don’t think people should worry about this election” POLITICO before the election. “I think people need to worry about the direction of the court and what it might do for the vote in the future.”
Instead, the case could serve as an important marker for the “independent legislator” theory. In short, the theory is that the Constitution gives state lawmakers the power to make electoral laws, and that the courts have usurped that role.
In two briefs filed Monday, 11 Republican attorneys general argued that the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court Violate the Constitution.
“The authority is specifically given to state legislators to determine the time, place and manner [and] Conditions for choosing your state, ”Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who headed one of the two briefs, said at a press conference Monday. The Pennsylvania State Supreme Court “overstepped its boundaries and encroached upon the authority of the legislature,” he said.
This theory was perhaps most famously advocated in the consensus of then Chief Justice William Rehnquist Bush versus Gore, the fight of the Supreme Court that effectively ruled the 2000 presidential election. Four current judges have either directly endorsed or signaled Rehnquist’s theory: Clarence Thomas (who signed Rehnquist’s original concurring opinion), Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Alito.
In addition, 10 of the 11 Republican Attorney General accepted the president’s arguments about widespread electoral fraud. But her letter quoted isolated cases from previous elections, not a common problem with this one.
It is part of a wider assault on the legitimacy of this year’s Republican Party elections.
In Georgia, US Republican Senators of the state – Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue – called on Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to resign, alleging widespread violations without claiming a specific case. The Republican Party and its house delegation both signed letters to Raffensperger making similar claims. Raffensperger strongly opposed both requests to step down, noting that there was a problem with the election.
“We will make sure that we are following the process, that we count every legal ballot and that the results will be the results,” he said in one Interview with the Atlanta Journal Constitution. “I’m a constitutional conservative. I follow the law.”
Raffensperger’s GOP broadside caused a case of strange bedfellows, with some constituencies that previously clashed with the Georgian Secretary of State coming to defend the elections.
“Questioning the results of our elections is a grave disadvantage for Georgian voters – and also for the tens of thousands of people who worked to ensure that our November 3rd elections were held safely and securely in the midst of a pandemic,” Aunna said Dennis executive director of Common Cause Georgia said in a statement Tuesday.