- Feb 11, 2017
- Reaction score
Since this came up "after" the election, where it would similarly invalidate their primary elections, carried out under the same unconstitutional rules.Wrong.
The judge said there are several possible remedies, and that isn’t one of them.
Understand what you are arguing. It’s not just the Presidential election in PA that is under question. It is the entire election in PA that is under question. Everything.
Note also that in court, the plaintiffs will be asked “You knew about this for months. Why are you filing this complaint now?” If they were concerned about the constitutionality of the election, why are they filing it three weeks after the election?
The reason, of course, is because they lost. But they won’t say that. This means the judges will be under pressure to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people, which they will be loathe to do.
So the odds of this actually happening are low.
There is an issue of "severability", where they may seek to throw out some of the votes (those done under the unconstitutional law) while retaining others. But this scheme may not be available, because like with many cases, if some of the rules under which something happened, they don't recalculate, but instead invalidate the entire event.
If the case goes to its logical conclusion, the PA primary elections, and the PA general election is thrown out. And the whole thing has to be rescheduled.