Mike Kelly, Sean Parnell Request To Declare Mail-In Voting Unconstitutional In Pennsylvania, Deny Re
Source: cbslocal.com
Mike Kelly, Sean Parnell Request To Declare Mail-In Voting Unconstitutional In Pennsylvania, Deny Results From 2020 Election Mail-In Ballots
They are calling upon the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to rule against "universal" mail-in ballot provisions.
November 21, 2020 at 3:39 pm
HARRISBURG (KDKA) Congressman Mike Kelly and congressional candidate Sean Parnell are requesting the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to declare universal mail-in voting unconstitutional in the state and deny the votes of the majority of Pennsylvanians who voted by mail in the Nov. 3 election.
In the official request, the plaintiffs specifically cite issue with Act 77 and its universal mail-in ballot provisions.
They allege that the provisions that allow all qualified electors to vote by mail in Pennsylvania are unconstitutional.
As such, they are calling for mail-in ballots that they allege do not meet Constitutional requirements to not be certified and for only legal votes to be certified or for the Pennsylvania General Assembly to choose the electors and compensate the legal costs of the plaintiffs.
Both Kelly and Parnell are registered Republicans.
Read more: https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/11/21/mail-in-voting-legal-challenge-pennsylvania/
I would think Republicans in congress would be embarrassed by now. But I guess not. They just let the idiot Trump make fools of themselves--and the Republicans!! Insane
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
Link to tweet
?s=20
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,741 posts)RealityCheque
(473 posts)Reckless
Negligent
Cowards
Kablooie
(18,610 posts)Roy Rolling
(6,908 posts)We already have one. Fortunately, it may be only a Coup of Dunces.
Next time itll be worse if we dont make changes to the holes in our democracy that depend on honor and truthfulness to substitute for the rule of law. Trump has proven the risks of depending on tyrants to be self-regulating.
dchill
(38,441 posts)Rebl2
(13,462 posts)30 years🤬
IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,075 posts)... businessman first, statesman last. Got real bad after Clinton was elected in 1992.
ailsagirl
(22,885 posts)Bastard!!!!!!!!!
Of course, he had plenty of help
absolutely correct. He is the one who started it all and he is still at it today.
Marthe48
(16,898 posts)They are trying to deny a majority of legal votes. To protect somebody who has killed over 260,427 Americans. I could puke.
Cha
(296,844 posts)stupid fuck.
Ohiogal
(31,909 posts)He is a total Trump ass kissing douche
rainin
(3,010 posts)This is all terrifying. I hear what they're trying and I don't know the chances of success. It seems like we have to win 100% of the time and they only have to win once for the whole thing to fall like dominos. I need to hear Bob Bauer daily for reassurance. I need him to tell me it's going to be ok.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,265 posts)FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT,
INC.; GLENN THOMPSON; MIKE KELLY; ...
v.
KATHY BOOCKVAR, in her capacity as
Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania ...
All of this was on full display in Pennsylvanias June 2, 2020 Primary Election.
That election proved that Defendants are unwilling to properly administer the Pennsylvania
General Assemblys new mail-in voting law, Act 77, that made significant changes to
Pennsylvanias elections, and instead have opted to promote unlimited use of unmonitored mailin voting.
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2020-07/Plaintiffs%27%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf
Kelly and the Trumpistas lost: https://casetext.com/case/donald-j-trump-for-president-inc-v-boockvar-3
And if all but 1 GOP representative voted for Act 77, does that mean Kelly did?
LeftInTX
(25,126 posts)They tried that in Texas over modifications for COVID. The all Republican Texas Supreme Court dismissed the case.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,265 posts)Anything's possible with Republicans, I suppose ...
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)not even a state Rep.
From our state Attorney General -
Link to tweet
TEXT
@JoshShapiroPA
The candidates + elected officials who joined this suit should be ashamed of themselves. Theyre asking a court to throw out the votes of 2.5 million Pennsylvanians.
Its another weak attempt to subvert the will of the people. Desperate, hypocritical, baseless... I could go on.
Brad Heath
@bradheath
Meanwhile, some Pennsylvania Republicans led by Rep. @MikeKellyPA are asking a state court to declare that the state's entire vote-by-mail system, violates the state constitution and that millions of votes cast this year must now be invalidated.
Image
5:41 PM · Nov 21, 2020
And Lt. Governor -
Link to tweet
TEXT
John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
·
Nov 21, 2020
Replying to @JohnFetterman
If PA doesnt certify our Election results, after November 30th, we technically dont have a State House of Representatives and 1/2 a state senate.
Which are controlled by Republicans.
😆
GIF
John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
Straight up amateur hour.
The only team with a history of losing this much is the Cincinnati Bengals.
1:59 PM · Nov 21, 2020 from Pittsburgh, PA
And delaying/invalidating ballots also invalidates the votes for the whole down-ballot ticket, including the entire PA state House (GOP-controlled), 1/2 the PA state Senate (GOP-controlled), and all 18 members of the Congressional delegation (9 (R) - 9 (D)).
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)the Cincinnati Bengals by the legendary Pittsburgh broadcaster and sports writer, Myron Cope. Cleveland was the "Cleve Brownies" or collapsed into "Cl-owns". Balt is the "ratbirds". Steelers, to other AFCN teams, are the "Squealers".
It's the same in Philly with "the Cowgirls" and so on.
Then there's Cope famous xmas carol "Deck the Broncos, they're just yonkos, fa lalala, lala, lala".
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)Oh wait...
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)to many western Pennsylvanians.
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)People just throwing trash on the ground even if there was trash can nearby or it was something small you could wad up and put in a pocket to toss when you got home. I never failed to be astounded by this behavior because it's not the way I was taught.
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)Tossed paper pizza plates, plastic take-out bags, and all manner of stuff out of car windows... But then there were and still are the "dumpers" who unload pickup trucks full of construction and home renovation crap into empty lots. They have put up surveillance cameras to finally start catching these idiots.
lonely bird
(1,676 posts)My Browns went 1-31 not that long ago.
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)Question: How can someone be in first place with a record of 3-5-1?
Answer: Be a member of the NFC East!!!
(Eagles will probably lose to the once-downtrodden now HOT Cleveland Browns )
Raven123
(4,791 posts)Wait until after the election to tell those who voted under its provisions. Given it had overwhelming GOP support, the stench is overwhelming.
ancianita
(35,932 posts)Dominion. It's almost as if they're working on ridding themselves of all voters, covid and Constitution be damned.
Bottom line for us, we need to call what they all do the clever-by-half maneuverings of bad losers.
rickyhall
(4,889 posts)Just sayin. They don't deserve the company of real human beings.
Raven123
(4,791 posts)Since the law was written with a provision that constitutional questions should be brought up in 6 months of its passage, and no one was in a hurry, what would be the big deal? No harm to wait as the only voter disenfranchisement would occur if the the law were indeed declared unconstitutional. No ones rights are at issue by leaving addressing this on a more relaxed schedule.
LeftInTX
(25,126 posts)They claimed it was a violation of the Texas constitution.
The state supreme court dismissed the case.
This was BEFORE the election.
There is no way a state supreme court will go along with this.
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)those arguments needed to be made within 6 months after passage.
The relevant election law was called "Act 77". I had posted this in another thread -
Act of Oct. 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 Cl. 25
Session of 2019
No. 2019-77
SB 421
AN ACT
(snip)
Section 12. Repeals are as follows:
(snip)
(2) The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear a challenge to or to render a declaratory judgment concerning the constitutionality of a provision referred to in paragraph (1). The Supreme Court may take action it deems appropriate, consistent with the Supreme Court retaining jurisdiction over the matter, to find facts or to expedite a final judgment in connection with such a challenge or request for declaratory relief.
(3) An action under paragraph (2) must be commenced within 180 days of the effective date of this section.
Section 14. This act shall apply to elections held on or after April 28, 2020.
Section 15. This act shall take effect as follows:
(1) The addition of section 207 of the act shall take effect in 180 days.
(2) The amendment of section 908 of the act shall take effect in 60 days.
(3) The remainder of this act shall take effect immediately.
APPROVED--The 31st day of October, A.D. 2019.
TOM WOLF
They had until this past April to do this and didn't. They would need to repeal or alter the law at this point and with a Democratic governor, that would mean a certain veto that they would be unable to override.
Raven123
(4,791 posts)... that provision would be irrelevant. The question is interesting. My comment basically suggests that no one was harmed by the law, regardless of whether it is constitutional, which is the basis for most challenges. Even if the absentee voters, voted in person, there no reason to believe they would have voted differently.
I for one am getting a real education in law this year! Thanks for responding
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)This suit would be referencing the law's relationship to the PA state Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution (a dispute of which would need to be filed in federal court, their previous attempts of which have been thrown out over and over and over in that venue ).
In this case, what the law does is take the existing election code that permitted "absentee ballots" (which have been around for many many decades) and creates a version of the "absentee ballot" process that removes the required allowable reasons to vote absentee, which then makes these ballots a "no-excuse absentee ballot".
I.e., the use of an absentee ballot requires specific permitted reasons for not being able to vote at the designated polling place on election day (e.g., "out of town on that day", "incapacitated", etc.). With the expansion of "absentee ballots" to a model no longer needing an excuse (although still retaining the original absentee ballot process), then what reason would be valid that would not throw out the whole absentee ballot process used for critical people including our military serving overseas?
And given there have been no challenges over many decades (that I am aware of) to the original absentee ballot process, then what makes this different?
What is in place in PA is different from what other states have implemented - including next door neighbor state New Jersey, where the state automatically sends out "mail ballots" to every registered voter. Here in PA, you have to explicitly apply for a "no-excuse absentee ballot" (the technical name for it), and then when approved, you are given the option to continue that method for any remaining elections for that year only. The following year if you want to vote in that manner, you have to re-apply for a "no-excuse absentee ballot", otherwise you would need to show up at your designated polling location if you plan to vote and don't apply for a regular absentee ballot (with an excuse).
And as a sidenote - both KY and UT, ruby red states, have this type of ballot and used them for their elections. Why aren't those being challenged in court by their campaign?
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)that the law has to treat everyone the same? IIRC, that's the reason we've been unable to move away from a flat income tax to a graduated one.
Under that logic, I'd think the expansion of absentee voting clearly would meet that "equal treatment" criteria. Plus we used the new system in the primary, which was also held during the current epidemic, and no one complained about it.
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)that was basically the gist. The judge indicated that the thrust should be for more voting rather than less and that the plaintiff didn't show that the fault of the allegations was that of the SOS, as the offer was made to all counties.
I read an analysis yesterday (I think in the Inquirer) that IIRC indicated that there were 4 red counties in PA where a majority of mail-in ballots were for 45 (have to find the article again), so it wasn't like the option wasn't available to all and that GOP voters were somehow unable to use the option.
The arguments the "voters" who were part of the suit made, was that their counties didn't avail them of the ability to cure, but that's not Boockvar's fault (I think one of the counties in the suit was Lancaster).
Happy Hoosier
(7,216 posts)I doubt either man can demonstrate standing and there is no way a court tosses out 2.5 million votes as redress even if they could. The time to file a suit about the 2020 elections is months ago. No court is going to disenfranchise voters on that scale.
TomDaisy
(1,860 posts)how can it be Constitutional in one state but not another?
yourmovemonkey
(266 posts)Since the process of elections are delegated to each individual state, most legal questions regarding elections would be decided based on that particular state's laws.
Kablooie
(18,610 posts)Throwing all their eggs into the coup basket.
I sure hope this comes back to sting him like a murder hornet.
rso
(2,267 posts)They are doing this in State Court, so even in the extremely unlikely event that the State Judge rules in favor of Don the Con, the eventual appeal would be heard before the 5-2 Democratic Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,488 posts)Besides, if they thought it was unconstitutional, why didn't they bring suit well before the election?
I'm sure this will make lots of noise on Faux News and right-wing talk radio, just as they wish.
KY........
usajumpedtheshark
(672 posts)Rhiannon12866
(204,755 posts)I voted absentee the entire time I was in college and when I worked on my congressman's campaign, I told parents how to request absentee ballots for heir kids who were college students. And hasn't Trump voted absentee?
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)Link to tweet
TEXT
@NASA_Astronauts
From the International Space Station: I voted today
Kate Rubins
Image
4:30 PM · Oct 22, 2020
I know the 4 years I was away at college I voted absentee and my mom would tell me that when she went to vote at our polling place, the poll workers (who usually know the regulars who vote every election) would tell her that yes indeed, they got my absentee ballot (since they are sent in well before the election and handed over to the Division to register and eventually process on or after election day).
Rhiannon12866
(204,755 posts)I remember seeing them on the news! And when I was in college, my mother made sure that I got an absentee ballot - and we got calls from other parents at campaign headquarters when I worked for my congressman so I gave instructions to them. I must have voted absentee before I ever voted in person because I was away at school before I was even 18 - unless you count the times when I was really little and went into the voting booth with my father, he'd pick me up and tell me which levers to push, though I have no idea who I voted for...
BumRushDaShow
(128,441 posts)They were tanks!!
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)jmowreader
(50,528 posts)The first lawsuit questioning the validity of the election? Irritating, but everyone has the right to be heard. After the courts found the election to be acceptably clean, that should have been the end of it. Do like Jimmy Carter and George HW Bush did and start planning your post-presidency life. (In the case of this president, that involves ordering a copy of the book How to Survive Federal Prison.)
Trumps minions have filed so many baseless suits were now somewhere between harassing and malicious. Fines are now in order, if not jail time for contempt of court.
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)The court gave Kelly, Parnell et al until Monday morning to re-file their case.