I have a hard time believing the swamp PA judges would give Trump a win on that case if this is true. Did the case nullify any section of Act 77? I thought it just held that the SOS did not act in accordance with Act 77.
Is there any sentence in Act 77 that is unconstitutional? Or is the problem just that by changing the law without state legislature at the last moment (nov 1), that new change is unconstitutional?
Well, it is a critical weakness in the Act that could be a huge win, but it has to be stricken by SCOTUS, and that's a long ways out. It is hopeful though. I don't know about constitutionality. They might be able to go after it under the equal protection clause if they can demonstrate that the equal protection failures are inherent to the law itself. That is how blacks were given the right to vote, after all.
Sounds liek it to me.
I have a hard time believing the swamp PA judges would give Trump a win on that case if this is true. Did the case nullify any section of Act 77? I thought it just held that the SOS did not act in accordance with Act 77.
Good point.
Is there any sentence in Act 77 that is unconstitutional? Or is the problem just that by changing the law without state legislature at the last moment (nov 1), that new change is unconstitutional?
Well, it is a critical weakness in the Act that could be a huge win, but it has to be stricken by SCOTUS, and that's a long ways out. It is hopeful though. I don't know about constitutionality. They might be able to go after it under the equal protection clause if they can demonstrate that the equal protection failures are inherent to the law itself. That is how blacks were given the right to vote, after all.
Source?