PA Judge orders segregated ballots should *not* be counted. *yawn* Makes no difference.

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:
Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker
BREAKING: Pennsylvania.🗳️

Judge orders segregated ballots should *not* be counted. It rules the PA Secretary of State "lacked statutory authority" to override election law. Critically, the state has a Republican state legislature.

#SCOTUS may ultimately decide the case now.
Image

[lindysalsagal]

1. So, how many people voted absentee back when they believed their vote counted?

I think we should sue about that on their behalf. Even though it doesn't change the winner, this must be challenged for future races.

Those people were not allowed to exercise their rights.

[Ms. Toad]

16. This issue was known when they voted, so if they chose to drop their ballot

in the mail, rather than a delivery box or the returning it it to the BOE, they did so knowing there was a risk it might arrive past the statutory deadline.

That awareness is likely why there were so few arriving in the a 3-day window - all the advice was not to count on the 3-day window, and not to mail it at all if it was closer than a week out.

The decision the court made to extend the deadline was quite reasonable, but there was always a question of whether it would survive - and it still may if it is appealed (The proper process to advocate on behalf of these voters).

[FarPoint]

2. Anyone know how many votes are being refused!

I think this punishment is unwarranted. Voters followed the instructions.

[vollehosen]

5. About 10k

[Nevilledog]

6. I've read 10,000. They do not figure into Biden's lead, at all, since they were never counted.

[FarPoint]

9. Ahhhh...good but still

Voters are the ones being denied....

Let's see how an appeal turns out....for the People!

[greenjar_01]

7. About 10,000

[FarPoint]

12. Thank you for the information..

[Laelth]

3. Joe still wins, afaik. Who cares? n/t

-Laelth

[yellowcanine]

13. I do. We should all care about people losing their vote.

[stopdiggin]

26. yes we should

But voters also have to learn to exercise that right within the framework of rules set up. And we should note that that deadline for receipt had already been extended by days to provide additional "cushion." The upshot? Returning a ballot this late is -- ill advised, at best. Perhaps negligent.

[Laelth]

34. Agreed.

But we’re talking about a legal challenge, here. No Court is going to care unless its ruling might change the outcome of the election. Here, Joe wins either way, so a Court is likely to dismiss a lawsuit seeking to redress this particular grievance.

-Laelth

[BComplex]

17. Who cares? Well, I'm sure those who went to the trouble to cast their ballots care. Plus

what happens in future elections? Does the law need to change? Or do people have to be instructed differently in the future?

[stopdiggin]

28. this situation (and the issue involved)

arose because of "amendment provisions" to the law extending leniency for late arrivals. Thus, the actual election laws (and instructions given to voters) -- are kind of outside the scope here.

If PA decides to continue going forward with "at will" mail in ballots -- they might want to consider building some kind of "buffer" into a receipt date. On the other hand -- they are under no obligation to do so.
----- -----

[Laelth]

33. I hear that.

But no Court is going to care unless the complaint is going to make a difference in the outcome. Here, it won’t, afaik.

-Laelth

[exboyfil]

4. Good job to get the word out to stop mailing them

and kudos to Judge Sullivan who forced the sweeps of the Post Office. He received his appointments from both Republican and Democratic presidents.

[onenote]

8. Who should we sue?

The Secretary of State who has been held to have misapplied state law by saying votes received after Election Day can be counted?

[crimycarny]

10. This absolutely needs to be challenged

Voters were following the law made at the time. Now their most precious rights are being yanked away. Thankfully this won’t change the end result but this ruling cannot go unchallenged!

[Statistical]

14. The law says election day. That is the problem.

We need to not be making these kind of last minute executive decisions. Look we extended and now your vote doesn't count. I get the desire/intent but is incredibly risky for exactly this reason. It gave voters a false sense of security. It would have been better to not change it and then voters wouldn't have relied on that false sense of security. Now the good news is >99% of voters didn't rely on this but it doesn't make it any less dumb.

Change it IN THE LAW months prior to the election or if you can't (because it is controlled by Republicans) just concentrate on GOTV and make sure every ballot is received well before election day.

[Ms. Toad]

22. Unfortunately the Republican legislature was in charge of changing the law -

and they refused to.

I think the court decision was reasonable, in response to the disruption of the mail/the delay in ballots arrriving/the county that got the wrong ballots. The Legislature should have passed a special exception to - but for political reasons they did not.

We always knew there was a possibility these votes woouldn't be counted - and all of the PR was to mail early and, if you couldn't, drop the ballot off personally. If I were advising the Biden team I'd say leave it alone - it doesn't change the outcome, and it is better if there is not a Supreme Court decision cementing the interpretation that legislature means strictly statutory law - not statutory law as interpreted by the PA courts.

In other words, appealing it could do more harm than good (from a long-term perspective).

[Statistical]

11. In the future this is why we need to make early voting even earlier and in statute.

Late changes by executive are ALWAYS going to be challenged changes that go past election day doubly so.

It is a ticking time bomb. Get the ballots to people early let them vote early. Tell them to mail it back at least a week for before election day.

In this case Biden wins without it but we might not be as lucky next time. Last minute changes that go past election day is just playing fire. It is going to blow up one time.

[exboyfil]

29. One of the tricks the GOP was pulling

was getting 3rd party candidates on ballots at the last minute forcing reprinting. They did everything they could to close the window to vote in most states.

The GOP ideal situation is to force 10,000 people per voting machine in the urban areas for the 10 hours on election day and have a ten page ballot full of extraneous ballot issues. This being the only opportunity you have to vote.

[Statistical]

30. Yeah they think of every possible trick don't they.

All that suppression and they still lost.

[Spazito]

15. I hope it goes to SCOTUS...

and isn't just left at this stage, the voters who believed they were following the law and cast their vote accordingly shouldn't be disenfranchised, imo, and should have the right to be heard at the highest Court at the very least.

[crimycarny]

20. The tweet is misleading

Here is a clearer explanation of the ruling. I thought this order applies to the original deadline of Nov 9th, but it only applies to a later rule that extended the date for voters to “cure” their ballots to 11/12.

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/crime-courts/2020/11/12/trump-campaign-election-2020-presidential-pennsylvania-lawsuit-ballots-late-identification/stories/202011120132

“It is not clear how many mail-in and absentee ballots fall into this category, and the Pennsylvania Department of State declined to comment on how many ballots would be affected. However, these ballots only applied to first-time voters whose identities had not been confirmed prior to the Nov. 9 deadline.”

[Spazito]

21. Ahhh, thank you, that is quite different...

thanks for the clarifying info.

[crimycarny]

24. Yes, freaked me out at first

Then someone included the Post Gazette article in response to the original tweet and my blood pressure went down a bit...

[Ms. Toad]

23. Thanks . . . I fell into the trap of not going directly to the source.

I think the issue is likely still the same (who gets the last word on election law). But I am usually more careful.

[Cha]

18. Well isn't that Judge Special.. Thankfully

it matters not one whiff as far as Joe Biden Winning PA!

[Whiskeytide]

25. Several congressional seats were ...

... won by Dems by only 10-12k votes. I don’t think it will matter, but the votes still should be counted.

[Cha]

27. Yes the votes should be Counted &

10-12K Votes sounds like a lot to me.

[Statistical]

31. To be clear none of these ballots are included in any totals.

So including them would only increase Democratic margins. Not including them would mean zero reduction in Democratic margins because none of these ballots are included in current margin totals.

Not saying they shouldn't be included just pointing that out so lower the blood pressure.

[maxsolomon]

19. POSTMARKED BY

GOP Legislatures could change this whenever they want. But they don't, because they don't want votes counted.

[yellowcanine]

32. Wrong case I believe. Not the late arriving ballots case.

Unless there were two cases ruled on today I think this case was about how long people had to "fix" a ballot.

[Roland99]

35. CORRECT. This was just on the Nov 9 to 12 extension for CURING ballots