For those interested in discussing the rule of law as opposed to engaging in a political partisan food fight, see Pennsylvania Court Strikes Down Mail-In Voting Law As Unconstitutional,
.
JANUARY 31, 2022,
“With Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices elected on a partisan ticket and Democrats currently holding a 5-2 majority on the state’s high court, Democrats are predicting the no-excuse mail-in voting law will be upheld. That forecast seems accurate given the hyper-partisan approach to legal analysis seen since the 2020 election. It’s unfortunate because yesterday’s opinion in McLinko v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania reached the proper conclusion as a matter of constitutional analysis and controlling precedent”.
Aside from the author providing historical documentation confirming why no-excuse mail-in voting violates Article VII, Section 14 of Pennsylvania’s Constitution, the indication that a political partisan court may ignore the rule of law and inject its feelings as the rule of law is very scary indeed.
With that in mind, and to determine the true meaning of Article VII, Section 14 of PA’s Constitution, the Judge, in striking down no-excuse mail in ballots as being unconstitutional in his
WRITTEN OPINION, takes the time to fully document the entire legislative history with regard to Article VII, Section 14.
If you follow the above link and scroll down to
page 21, and read forward, it seems crystal clear the very purpose of the constitutional provision [Article VII, Section 14] is to explicitly limit the use of mail-in absentee ballot as provided in the section.
Incidentally, the historical documentation is very, very interesting, especially how absentee voting was introduced into the Pennsylvania Constitution and why!
JWK
What makes a Supreme Court opinion legitimate is when it is in harmony with the text of our Constitution and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.