The Supreme Court on Friday refused to block a lower court’s ruling that Pennsylvania voters whose mail-in ballots were rejected due to errors can cast provisional ballots.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the issue was “of considerable importance,” but in a statement joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, he sided with the Republican National Committee (RNC) at this time. “We cannot prevent the consequences they are concerned about,” he said.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court dominated The Oct. 23 4-3 decision to give voters a second chance to cast a provisional ballot in person if their mail-in ballot is rejected was a decision that Republicans argued “drastically” changed the rules. ” and “departed from the clear provisions of election law.” ”
Republicans asked the Supreme Court on Monday to block the ruling, writing in a petition that it marks “the second consecutive presidential election in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has changed key election rules at the last minute.” .
“Even if the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision does not change the outcome of the election, the question of whether provisional ballots can be included in the vote total will remain a specific issue that this court can consider.” The RNC made the argument in an emergency application. “Reviewing the court’s authority even after Election Day (when the pressure of an immediate election is removed) would provide valuable guidance for future elections.”
The U.S. Supreme Court will meet in Washington, DC on July 1, 2024. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to rule Monday on the most anticipated decision of the term: a “long-standing” decision on whether former President Donald Trump is immune from prosecution. (Photo by Drew Angerer/AFP via Getty Images)
Alito wrote that the lower court’s ruling “concerns just two votes in the long-completed Pennsylvania primary.”
“Upholding that ruling does not impose binding obligations on Pennsylvania officials responsible for conducting this year’s elections,” he wrote. “And because the only state election official party to this incident is a member of a small county election board, we are ordering other election boards to quarantine the affected ballots. I can’t do that.”
The Pennsylvania Democratic Party previously said the RNC presented the justices with “no good reason” to block the lower court’s ruling. (Related: ‘Inviting fraud’: Court ruling could cause a repeat of 2020 vote-counting chaos in key battleground states)
“Simply put, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision that voters whose mail-in ballots have not been counted can provisionally exercise their statutory right to vote (rather than be completely disenfranchised) is based on Pennsylvania law. This is a simple and correct interpretation,” the party said in a paper on Wednesday. filing.
Butler County Voter Attorney Faith Guenther; “cited selectively from Pennsylvania election law and abandoned any attempt to accurately or fairly present the actual interpretive issues facing the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.” Frank Mathis argued in a court filing Wednesday.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
