Pennsylvania to count undated ballots, election official says, despite US Supreme Court ruling

[Meister]

The May ruling by the 3rd Circuit came in a lawsuit by several elderly Democratic and Republican voters upset that their votes would not be counted for neglecting to write the date on the mail-in ballot envelope - what they called a "meaningless technicality."

If memory serves me right, there was signature violations where they were even comparing signatures.
Again, people lose faith in the process.

 

[1srelluc]

This is exactly why the state apparatus has to be removed from dem hands.....Shooting wars have started for less.

 

[multivita-man]

Does this increase or decrease citizens faith in elections? Will your DOJ get involved?

Pennsylvania to count undated ballots, election official says, despite US Supreme Court ruling

Pennsylvania election officials have been instructed to count ballots arriving in undated envelopes despite a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.

www.foxnews.com

Pennsylvania to count undated ballots, election official says, despite US Supreme Court ruling​

A top election official in Pennsylvania says the state will disregard the U.S. Supreme Court's guidance on counting mail-in ballots arriving in envelopes with typos or incorrect dates, saying that the state's Commonwealth Court has already established the practice as licit.

Pennsylvania's election laws have historically required voters to include a signature and date on the outside of return envelopes when voting by mail.

However, acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman announced that Pennsylvania election officials should continue counting ballots that arrive with improperly filled-out envelopes, in accordance with the Commonwealth Court's previous ruling on the matter.

There's nothing binding in the SCOTUS opinion. It's basically an opinion from the higher court saying "We believe the lower court got this decision wrong" but the force of the decision doesn't go beyond just that - an opinion. It's possible that future actions by the SCOTUS have more direct impact. The decision is basically leaving that door open. Had they come to a different conclusion they would have affirmed the lower court ruling for good, which they didn't want to do because they seem to be saying, we will take such controversies on a case-by-case basis.

The 3rd Circuit court basically agreed that citizens votes can't be rejected because of a simple error - that's in the federal voting rights act.

 

[MinTrut]

Does this increase or decrease citizens faith in elections? Will your DOJ get involved?

Pennsylvania to count undated ballots, election official says, despite US Supreme Court ruling

Pennsylvania election officials have been instructed to count ballots arriving in undated envelopes despite a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.

www.foxnews.com

Pennsylvania to count undated ballots, election official says, despite US Supreme Court ruling​

A top election official in Pennsylvania says the state will disregard the U.S. Supreme Court's guidance on counting mail-in ballots arriving in envelopes with typos or incorrect dates, saying that the state's Commonwealth Court has already established the practice as licit.

Pennsylvania's election laws have historically required voters to include a signature and date on the outside of return envelopes when voting by mail.

However, acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman announced that Pennsylvania election officials should continue counting ballots that arrive with improperly filled-out envelopes, in accordance with the Commonwealth Court's previous ruling on the matter.

It's all very antebellum.

 

[multivita-man]

If memory serves me right, there was signature violations where they were even comparing signatures.
Again, people lose faith in the process.

There's no reason to lose faith in the process. If you write your signature on a ballot certifying your vote and it gets rejected because you wrote it in pencil instead of ink, or because you wrote it in green ink instead of blue or black, that's not a valid reason to reject a ballot. In fact rejecting a ballot generally has to be for some material reason.

 

[Failzero]

Why should a ballot be rejected due to an error on the envelope it was mailed in?

4 days late ?

 

[MinTrut]

This is exactly why the state apparatus has to be removed from dem hands.....Shooting wars have started for less.

My thoughts as well.

We have been in very dangerous territory since unhinged psychopath Hillary and her band of Brownshirts began their hysterical attacks on the country in 2016.

I don't see this ending well.

 

[BlindBoo]

If memory serves me right, there was signature violations where they were even comparing signatures.
Again, people lose faith in the process.

Not in this case. It was all about mailed in ballots and the lack of a hand written date on the outside envelope. Not about signatures or the post mark date on the envelope.

 

[rightwinger]

The state sends you an official mail in ballot three weeks before the election
If it is returned before Election Day or has a postmark
Who cares if the voter wrote a date on it?

Triviality

 

[MisterBeale]

Why should a ballot be rejected due to an error on the envelope it was mailed in?

If you want to have the privilege of not showing up on election day like every other registered voter, showing your ID and doing what every other voter has to do, to cast a legitimate, legal vote?

You best cross all your t's, and dot all your i's, or else your ballot is spoiled, simple as that.

This isn't brain surgery.



And you are asking really dumb questions at this point. Show up to vote, do it right, or don't don't have your voice heard.

The only folks that can't get this, are either too dumb to participate in the process anyway or foreign subversives.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

This is exactly why the state apparatus has to be removed from dem hands.....Shooting wars have started for less.

wow, look at all these big government folks wanting the Feds to overrule the states

 

[multivita-man]

If you want to have the privilege of not showing up on election day like every other registered voter, showing your ID and doing what every other voter has to do, to cast a legitimate, legal vote?

You best cross all your t's, and dot all your i's, or else your ballot is spoiled, simple as that.

This isn't brain surgery.

And you are asking really dumb questions at this point. Show up to vote, do it right, or don't don't have your voice heard.

The only folks that can't get this, are either too dumb to participate in the process anyway or foreign subversives.

No. The only real requirement is that you are eligible to vote and make a good faith effort to comply with voting laws. Arguing that fewer votes should be counted is arguing against democratic representation.

 

[multivita-man]

wow, look at all these big government folks wanting the Feds to overrule the states

Like, what they're basically arguing is that if they make a mistake on a government form, the government should take it literally. By this logic, a math error on a 1040 should result in a criminal prosecution.

 

[1srelluc]

Like, what they're basically arguing is that if they make a mistake on a government form, the government should take it literally. By this logic, a math error on a 1040 should result in a criminal prosecution.

The ATF rejects the various Class III weapon forms for typos all the time.

 

[ClaireH]

I like this 2012 quote about the fine city of Philadelphia, PA :
“Everyone knows there is something wrong but no one wants to do anything about it. Welcome to Philadelphia. The only solace for the residents of the city is the knowledge that if you die between now and 2016, you’ll still be eligible to vote and someone will probably do it for you. It is a joke that is getting old.”

Some things never change. Not just a state known for deed fraud, but voter fraud.

It's Time for a Real Investigation Into Philadelphia Voter Fraud | The Philly Post

Every four years, as Philadelphians go to polls to cast a vote for president, Philly is a joke on the national news. We need to get elections right.

www.phillymag.com

 

[mudwhistle]

Why should a ballot be rejected due to an error on the envelope it was mailed in?

Errors like no postal date, no signature?
Ballots sent to an address that doesn't exist?

 

[1srelluc]

Errors like no postal date, no signature?
Ballots sent to an address that doesn't exist?

 

[rightwinger]

What possible difference does it make if the voter wrote the date on his ballot?

If he writes a date before Election Day and it is received well after Election Day, it is still discarded

 

[multivita-man]

The ATF rejects the various Class III weapon forms for typos all the time.

Okay, but you can still buy a gun, eh?

 

[MisterBeale]

The only real requirement is that you are eligible to vote and make a good faith effort to comply with voting laws.

This, "goof faith," argument? Is politicized. It is never applied evenly across the political spectrum. And it still isn't. We have a two-tiered form of justice. It is only applied, when and where it is convenient. Sometimes it is applied, others, not so much, so, it is a bullshit way to rig elections, clearly. It all depends on the agenda, the judge, and who is in power, and who they WANT to be in power.

Pennsylvania: Mail ballots can't be discarded over signature

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — With concerns rising in Pennsylvania that tens of thousands of mail-in ballots will be discarded in the presidential election over technicalities, officials in the presidential battleground told counties they aren't allowed to reject a ballot solely because an election officia

apnews.com

5 GOP Michigan governor candidates failed to file enough valid petition signatures, officials say

On Monday, five Michigan Republican candidates for governor failed to file enough nominating signatures that would qualify them for the August primary.

www.clickondetroit.com

Good faith effort? Didn't mean squat. The firm hired to do polling and petition gathering was corrupted by the establishment, and rather than be given more time, the electorate has been given a candidate that they did not want primarily, it was rigged and a fraud, just like what you post.

You don't give a shit about what the people want, you just care about what you want. What we have are double standards. The rich and powerful elites, whose judges are in their back pockets, get one set of standards, and the people? Well, fuck them, no "good faith,' for them, they usually don't even get a day in court.