Odd-Seaworthiness330 t1_iry5f0b wrote
The constitution is pretty straight forward on this issue. The legislature has the authority to make the rules for voting. The rules say that the ballot has to be dated along with the envelope. ONLY the legislature has the power to change the rules. This was not followed and in this case the judiciary changed the rules when they ruled on the date issue.
The Supreme Court in this matter ruled correctly.
HonBurgher t1_irysi7t wrote
The Third Circuit had ruled on a different principle that says if you make a minor mistake that’s not material to the reason for the rules, that’s not worth losing your vote over. The state courts had generally agreed. Since the purpose of the part that was being signed and dated is to say “I attest that I am who I say I am and I am qualified to vote,” the date part was not “material” because the important date was the date the ballot was received, not the date it was signed.
People were making other mistakes with the date, like putting their birthday or the date of the election there, and election boards were counting them; it was only the undated ballots that were being tossed out.
The Supreme Court did not say anything about why it was reversing the Third Circuit ruling that the ballots should be counted, except to send the case back with orders that it be declared moot. So another case could potentially hinge on the same arguments about the materiality of the date (and there were some cases in state court moving to do so in the Oz/McCormick primary until McCormick conceded).
captrespect t1_irzly2u wrote
What BS. The default should be to assume the person voted unless there is a real question. Then they should investigate before a vote is tossed out. There is no reason to think that the person didn’t intent to vote if they didn’t fill out a date by mistake.
Voting is supposed to be a sacred right in this country and you people want to throw that away.
stahleo t1_is1cwmr wrote
Voting is not a sacred right. There are qualifications in order to vote - it's a privilege.
scotticusphd t1_is06pmw wrote
The voting rights act would like to have a word with you.
Odd-Seaworthiness330 t1_is21p3s wrote
You are exactly correct. The voting rights act secured the right for minorities. However, that act does not supersede the constitution of the United States. The rules were set by the Pennsylvania legislature as directed. Only the legislature can change the rules. This judge over stepped his legal authority.
scotticusphd t1_is2dkzx wrote
The voting rights act constrained what legislatures could do to curtail equal voting protections for our citizens. To suggest that this type of regulation isn't possible stands in the face of hundreds of years of precedent.
The constitution also holds up the judiciary as a co-equal branch to legislatures that can hold them in check if they step on the constitutionally-protected rights of our citizens. Discarding someone's vote because of a clerical error, when a postmark fulfills the intent and purpose of the hand-written date is fucking stupid, and suggests that dogmatic reading of one part of the constitution is somehow more important than an individual's, or in this case hundreds of individuals' right to vote.
Time-U-1 t1_iryk525 wrote
Why are you so afraid of people participating in elections? Is it because you know your candidate will lose if you let too many people (or the wrong people) vote?
I love America because here, all citizens are allowed to exercise their voice by voting.
I’ll never understand how anyone who loves this country would want to take away votes from fellow Americans.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is0ufdb wrote
I’m really impressed, I have never watched someone make such a huge leap.
Just so many assumptions about OP. None of which can be inferred from his posting.
Time-U-1 t1_is2kz9s wrote
Really? It’s patriotic to throw out a ballot that has been received before Election Day because it’s not dated?
Dr_Worm88 t1_is2lzdi wrote
That’s not the stance anyone is taking. The ruling was correct. If you want to make changes you have to do so through the proper avenues.
Time-U-1 t1_is2w74c wrote
Uhm. That’s EXACTLY the stance. The ruling is unAmerican.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is2wznw wrote
How exactly?
Explain in detail how this is wrong.
Time-U-1 t1_is30bwg wrote
The Republicans want to throw out mailed ballots even though they were received prior to Election Day for a reason that does not have anything to do with ballot integrity. And that is unAmerican. Its a desperate attempt to silence fellow Americans and take away their right to vote. A right that was fought for and our beloved died for. But Republicans want to piss on it.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is30iwk wrote
Cool speech but that isn’t what was ruled on…
Time-U-1 t1_is33ytc wrote
Yeah it was.
“Republicans have sought to throw out undated mail ballots that arrive on time but without a handwritten date on their outer envelopes as required by state law.”
Dr_Worm88 t1_is34184 wrote
>as required by state law
Time-U-1 t1_is3cmo0 wrote
Right. A law with no purpose but to disenfranchise fellow Americans was passed by our Republican general assembly. Republicans want to nullify the votes of citizens for no other purpose (not to strengthen the integrity of the vote, not to deter fraud, etc) than to disenfranchise those who vote via mail. And that is unAmerican.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3dc2k wrote
Okay.
So address the issue the right way.
Time-U-1 t1_is3e7xn wrote
What do you mean?
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3h856 wrote
Follow the legislative process to changing a law. The crux of the issue at hand. The process was against standing laws. Change the law through the appropriate governing body and it can’t be challenged.
Time-U-1 t1_is3ia0h wrote
But the persons with the power to change the law (Republicans are in majority in the general assembly) are more interested in seeing it enforced than changed!
I plan to vote straight Democrat to get laws like this one corrected.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3lp6y wrote
But that is how our government functions.
Time-U-1 t1_is3m8ni wrote
Republicans appealed the ruling to the US Supreme Court. They didn’t have to do that. They chose to enforce an unfair law.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3mxg2 wrote
They chose to enforce laws as they are written. This isn’t how you correct an unjust law.
Time-U-1 t1_is3pci1 wrote
They chose to enforce an unjust law instead of change it. Period.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3pkht wrote
Correct. But they aren’t under any obligation by their constituents to do so. You can’t just change laws without following the proper procedures.
It creates a very dangerous precedence.
Time-U-1 t1_is3skpa wrote
So if their constituents were of a higher integrity, and demanded the change on moral grounds (since no one is arguing that the law is rooted in any basis of common good), Republicans would then (and only then)have reason to change the unjust law?
Dr_Worm88 t1_is3xlhv wrote
I’m saying if you piss of your constituents you face losing re-election. That’s what drives most politicians.
Arguably a conservative going against this risks upsetting their base and losing votes.
Not sure why this seems weird it’s the root of politics.
Time-U-1 t1_is40wbn wrote
I understand what you are saying. I just find it sad that common decency isn’t a value amongst Republicans. You would know better than I.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is40y8c wrote
Why would I know better than you?
Time-U-1 t1_is41dbs wrote
Since you are a constituent of these Republican lawmakers.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is41jn5 wrote
Damn. Here I thought we had made real progress in your ability to not make baseless assumptions.
You know nothing of me or how I vote.
Time-U-1 t1_is58mzn wrote
Cool. Cool.
So you are planning to vote against all Republicans members of the general assembly?
Dr_Worm88 t1_is5903n wrote
Already voted. I also don’t party vote or vote against a candidate. I evaluate each one and determine how they would best represent me and vote accordingly.
Time-U-1 t1_is5znzk wrote
You are hilarious. I will continue to assume that you are voting for Republicans in our general assembly even though you know that they are acting unjustly, and unpatriotically. How sad.
But go ahead and clutch your pearls about my making assumptions.
Dr_Worm88 t1_is69oo1 wrote
Conclude all you want. You have nothing to support it and it matters not to me. The best part is you are just running on emotions at this point and no logic, not a good look.
I already voted so now it’s just time to wait and see how things go.
Time-U-1 t1_is6fr76 wrote
One question. Why would you trust the Republicans to improve our economy when it’s in their interest to trash it while Biden is in office?
Dr_Worm88 t1_is6g803 wrote
It doesn’t take trust. Just look historically. They bungle the economy pretty much every time they are in power.
[deleted] t1_irz40y6 wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments