An appeals court says 'undated' Pennsylvania ballots don't count

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
18,709
35,728
2,290
A huge victory for ballot integrity. Let's see what happens on any appeal to SCOTUS.



A federal appeals panel has set up a potential U.S. Supreme Court battle about Pennsylvania's mail-in ballots that could play a role in determining who wins this year's presidential election and other races in the key swing state.

Mailed ballots that arrive on time but in envelopes without dates handwritten by Pennsylvania voters or with incorrect dates should not be counted, a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday. Their 2-1 decision strikes down a lower court ruling.

The main legal issue surrounding what are often called "undated ballots" is whether not tallying them violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which says a person's right to vote cannot be denied for "an error or omission" that is "not material" in determining voting eligibility.

A current, handwritten date on the return envelope is required by Pennsylvania state law, but that date is not used to confirm if a person is eligible to vote. For past elections, the final vote tallies by county election officials have included ballots arriving in undated or misdated return envelopes.

In the panel's majority opinion, 3rd U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas Ambro said that what's known in legal circles as the materiality provision "only applies when the State is determining who may vote."

"In other words, its role stops at the door of the voting place," wrote Ambro, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, who was joined by Circuit Judge Cindy Chung, a Biden appointee. "The Provision does not apply to rules, like the date requirement, that govern how a qualified voter must cast his ballot for it to be counted."

Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz, an Obama appointee, dissented and wrote in a separate opinion that the provision "is not limited to that narrow group of documents" used to register to vote, as attorneys for the Republican National Committee argued in this case.

...


 
Soon enough we will see that Trump won that election. I know he won it. Rigged and stolen.
No fear, January 20, 2025 is just around the corner. Trump will be the 47th President of the USA and he will fix this BIDEN disaster.

61ZsfZqNCOL._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg
 
Why are Republicans afraid of voters? Because they lost the popular vote in 7 of the last 8 elections. :)
Why are Democrats afraid of IDs. My friend had to give his ID last week to buy Alka Seltzer. My lady had to give her SS# to get 2 hundred dollar bills broken at the bank. But it's too hard to show an ID to vote? Horse shit. Democrats are election fraudsters, plain and simply. I'm glad our federal court is finally going to expose the unconstitutionality of Pennsylvania's liberal bought courts. MAGA
 
Soon enough we will see that Trump won that election. I know he won it. Rigged and stolen.
No fear, January 20, 2025 is just around the corner. Trump will be the 47th President of the USA and he will fix this BIDEN disaster.

View attachment 923507
What Biden disaster is Trump gonna fix? What are the Biden's disasters????
 
Why are Democrats afraid of IDs. My friend had to give his ID last week to buy Alka Seltzer. My lady had to give her SS# to get 2 hundred dollar bills broken at the bank. But it's too hard to show an ID to vote? Horse shit. Democrats are election fraudsters, plain and simply. I'm glad our federal court is finally going to expose the unconstitutionality of Pennsylvania's liberal bought courts. MAGA
They show an ID for their 40 oz malt liquors all the time.....
 
Why are Democrats afraid of IDs. My friend had to give his ID last week to buy Alka Seltzer. My lady had to give her SS# to get 2 hundred dollar bills broken at the bank. But it's too hard to show an ID to vote? Horse shit. Democrats are election fraudsters, plain and simply. I'm glad our federal court is finally going to expose the unconstitutionality of Pennsylvania's liberal bought courts. MAGA
Show us the proof of election fraud in Pa. If you have the proof, you would be the only one.
 
Circuit Judge Patty Shwartz, an Obama appointee, dissented and wrote in a separate opinion that the provision "is not limited to that narrow group of documents" used to register to vote, as attorneys for the Republican National Committee argued in this case.
This opinion is an indefensible example of partisan bias. But that is what we get from Democrat-appointed judges.
 
What does that have to do with mail-in voting?
We have mail in voting to get the citizens that can't easily make it in person to vote, a method to still exercise their constitutional right to vote.

Proxy voting is what they do, to get more citizens to vote, that normally wouldn't or couldn't vote....allow another person, to Vote in person in your place.....which is something our election laws do not permit.

So yes they do not have mail in voting but have proxy voting.

And...

Yes we do have mail in voting but have no Proxy voting.
 

Forum List

Back
Top