4184
Comments (237)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
18
RussianAgent13 18 points ago +19 / -1

They can try a new election, if they think they can get it together in time, but the constitution says the election is on the first Tuesday of November. It's more likely all the ballots will be thrown out and they just don't count. Oopsie.

21
MisterKag 21 points ago +21 / -0

SCOTUS has the authority to modify that deadline to remedy the deprivation.

The Constitution is not designed or intended to railroad a deprivation under it.

A toss out of the post Election Day ballots is the correct remedy. But if the PA criminals have spoiled segregation of them, it has to be a re-vote. The Court cannot declare a victor. And the deprivation cannot stand.

7
HunterBidenCokeMirro 7 points ago +7 / -0

We won. No redo.

1
Ched 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why would SCOTUS call a re-vote rather than saying that the count after election night is irrevocably damaged, and the election night tally stands?

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
1
Ched 1 point ago +1 / -0

That sounds warm and fuzzy, but I disagree that it should be assumed that a voter who willingly gives up custody of their ballot before seeing it counted has an honest and good faith belief that their vote would be counted. If they were susceptible to democratic propaganda, that's on them. I do realize that this is irrelevant to a SCOTUS decision. Has there ever been a court-ordered redo on an election? I just think that it's more likely that they allow the election night count to stand.