The court's 5-3 ruling means that absentee ballots will be counted only if they are in the hands of municipal clerks by the time polls close on Nov. 3.
The justices determined the courts shouldn't be the ones to decide the election rules amid the coronavirus pandemic that is surging in Wisconsin and across the world.
"The Constitution provides that state legislatures — not federal judges, not state judges, not state governors, not other state officials — bear primary responsibility for setting election rules," Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in a concurring opinion.
Sounds like a precedent to me right there.
It is a precedent. It's THE precedent. You'd just have to prove which ones were late. So, any ballot that got there after polls shut down are invalid. End of story.
Re-read:
If accurate, general implications re legislative dominance not just mail in after the 3rd.
SCOTUS already wrote who does and doesn't set election laws. Paragraph 3.
In the states that are being sued, the decision to mass-mail out ballots and change election rules was made not by the legislature but by Secretaries of State, governors, a friend of someone who worked in the tax office, whatever. So by the Supreme Court ruling against the four states in the TX suit, they’re not just limiting themselves to saying the late ballots were unconstitutional. They’re saying the whole election was unconstitutional. And that precedent could apply to a lot more than just the four states in this suit.
It's not just the late mail-ins, any election rules made by parties other than State Legislature illegitimize the election. These states have attempted to certify a result that is the product of an illegitimate and unConstitutional election process.
From what I could tell all the provisions and new rules that various Governors and Sec of States made to allow the mail in ballots or other changes to the election in the name of "covid" were not valid. Any changes to election rules (or what constitutes a legal vote) needs to be passed through the state legislatures. The 4 states in the lawsuit did not do any of this (You could say other states as well) so those changes are not legal and thus any votes that were cast under those "rules" should be deemed illegal and not counted.
I read a post earlier today that New Jersey made changes as well but the made their changes to allow mail-in through their state legislature so in that case the mail in ballots would need to be counted since they were deemed legal. Proving they were fraudulent would be a different matter.
Again the big crux in the Texas lawsuit is the main point is that these votes are fraudulent but that new rules were put in place that violated the Constitution which should make those votes invalid.
Can we go back to California and remove mail in ballots from here as well? Our legislator and some congressmen were pretty upset that Gavin has changed the Elections laws without going threw the legislators.
"By signing Assembly Bill 860 into law, Newsom defused the principal legal argument against the universal vote-by-mail argument. Plaintiffs argued he had exceeded his authority by implementing a sweeping change to election management without consulting the Legislature."
https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/06/18/california-lawmakers-pass-november-mail-ballot-bill-with-surprising-gop-support-1293679
Looks like they avoided the extrslegal problem by getting the cucked legislature to pass. Whether the election was conducted according to statute is another question (like how other states deviated from specific statute). State legislature could pass a law that says Cali decides electors based on a beer pong tournament, if that's the manner the elected legislature chooses.
Phoneglish
Its the reason not the ruling that matters. Read the last paragraph.
^^^^^ 1000x THIS!
^^^^^ 1000x THIS!
You mean this?
Did you happen to notice if this was cited in the Texas suit?
In a sane world any ballot received after midnight of election day gets tossed. With the exception of citizens that are overseas and they were post marked on or before voting day
Any ballot cast and counted in contravention of the state election statute would be illegal. Schemes to alter statute outside the legislature would be unconstitutional. The constitution has remedies for illegal elections built in.
The only argument against this is that it can be abused by whoever is in charge of delivering ballots. If they're partisan shitbags like they seem to already be they could intentionally slow-walk the ballots so they end up late, but in a plausibly deniable way like "Oops! Guess all these Republican votes don't count. I just got stuck at a train crossing and couldn't make it on time. Darn!"
But they backdated. Plus Im sure they havent seperated them to say these batch of 50,000 were the 3am ballots we scanned 3 times.
If they mixed them all up to prevent separation, throw them all out
Only fair way is all polluted counts are out
Doesn't matter the fact they were accepted after the fact by decree is enough.
upTrump for primary sources.
It's annoying how they keep talking about how covid was this big safety issue.
I ain't got no book learnin', but I think you might be right, Lawyerpede.