In Pennsylvania, mail ballots are usually caused by the closing of voting on election day, even if they are postmarked. The state’s Supreme Court has extended the deadline in the state following a pro-democracy lawsuit. Citing coronavirus epidemics and deliverability concerns U.S. Inside the postal service.
The decision of the Supreme Court of the Republican state was rejected by the U.S. Wants to challenge in the Supreme Court. High Court First Deadlock, 4–4, On an emergency application to block the expansion of the state Supreme Court in mid-October. The court then refused to prosecute shortly before the election, but Open the left option To return after the election to make a decision. Last week, Justice Samuel Elito ordered that Late-coming ballots will be separated, But said if they “count separately.”
10,000 ballots are crucial for Biden’s victory in the crucial state of voting. He Currently leads With more than 47,000 ballots cast in the state as the vote count continues, Commonwealth Secretary Kathy Booker announced that about 94,000 provisional ballots were cast for voters in the state on election day. A provisional ballot is issued when there is a question about the eligibility of the voter. Eligibility is checked after the election and ballots are not counted if the voter is ineligible, so all 94,000 ballots will not be counted.
A Democrat named Bookover said Tuesday that the counties have done an impressive job of calculating the record number of mail ballots and are now using a temporary ballot, each of which must be considered individually. “Millions of Pennsylvania people voted and their voices were heard in a free, fair and open election last week. I am very proud of the election officials and polling workers who worked tirelessly in the midst of the epidemic so that the voters can decide this election. ”
Some suffrage experts have expressed confidence that the U.S. The Supreme Court will not eventually toss out late-arriving ballots in Pennsylvania, noting that voters followed the guidance of their election officials at the time. But, the case could serve as a key marker of how future election-law proceedings will proceed, they said.
For this case, “I don’t think people need to worry about this election,” said Wendy Weiser, director of the Democratic Program at the Brennan Center. Politico before the election. “I think people need to worry about the direction of the court and what it is doing for the right to vote going forward.”
Instead, the case could serve as an important marker on “independent assembly” theory. Theory, in short, argues that the Constitution gives state legislators the power to determine election laws, and that the courts have taken over this role.
In a brief filing Monday, 11 Republican state attorneys argued that the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court The order violates the constitution.
“Power is vested in state legislators, in particular, in time, place and manner [and] The framework for his state election, “Missouri Attorney General Eric Smith, who led one of the two briefs, told a news conference Monday. The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court” overstepped his bounds and encroached on the legislature’s authority, “he insisted.
That theory was probably the most prominent in the consensus of the later Chief Justice, William Rehnquist. Bush v. Gore, The battle of the Supreme Court that effectively decided the 2000 presidential election. Four current judges have endorsed or reaffirmed the Rehnquist’s doctrine: Clarence Thomas (who signed Rehnquist’s original consensus opinion), Brett Kavanagh, Neil Gorschuch, and Elito.
In addition, 10 out of 11 Republican attorneys general accept the president’s arguments about election fraud. But in their brief, the cases that have been isolated from previous elections are not a widespread problem.
It’s part of a wider attack on the legitimacy of this year’s election from the Republican Party.
In Georgia, both Republican U.S. senators from the state – Kelly Loffler and David Perdue – called for the resignation of Republican Secretary of State Brad Rafensprger, claiming widespread malpractice without setting any specific precedents. Both the State Republican Party and its House of Representatives signed the letters to Rafensperger with similar claims. Rafansparger strongly denied that he had sidelined both parties and there was a problem with the election.
“We’re going to make sure we follow through the process, that we’ll count every legal ballot, and the results will come,” he said in one. Atlanta Journal – Interview with Constitution. “I am a constitutional supporter. I follow the law. “
G.O.P. on Rafensperger. Broadside has led to clashes with some voting-rights groups with the Georgia secretary of state office defending the election.
“Questioning our election results is a serious observation for Georgia’s voters – and for the thousands of people who worked to ensure that the Nov. 3 election was conducted safely and securely amidst the epidemic.” The executive director of Common Cause Georgia said in a statement on Tuesday.
