قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / Early voting: Measures taken by the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania and North Carolina may fight post-election courts over mail-in ballots

Early voting: Measures taken by the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania and North Carolina may fight post-election courts over mail-in ballots



The court refused to accept Pennsylvania Republicans’ challenge on Pennsylvania’s postal voting deadline and temporarily shelved a decision of the state’s Supreme Court that votes can be accepted even within three days after the election. There is no clear postmark. Later, the court allowed counts of North Carolina ballots, as long as the ballots were sent before election day.

But this may not mean the end of the mail-in ballot contest.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Pennsylvania and North Carolina, two important states in the presidential election, came one day later. The court rejected the Democrats’ appeal to allow Wisconsin mailed votes three days after the election day. The postmark date is November 3.

Electoral law experts have been warning before the election that the court is unlikely to play a key role in the election results. The mailed ballots received after the election day will only account for a small portion of the total ballots.

However, if the election is approaching (for example, Pennsylvania is a decisive state, and votes received after November 3 may make a difference), the legal issues surrounding mailed ballots arriving after election day may suddenly rise to the forefront Republicans in the presidential election tried to throw away the votes they received after November 3, while Democrats advocated including them.

Steve Vladeck, a legal analyst at CNN and the Department of Law at the University of Texas, said on Twitter: “If Pennsylvania is not a tipping point, or is not but not It’s very close, so it’s okay, at least in this election.” Professor of the school.

Pennsylvania officials notified the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the state has issued guidance to county councils to “safely isolate”

; votes received after election day so that they can be identified when legal action is taken in the future.

After Vermont officials asked for correction, Cavano adjusted his vote

In Minnesota, the Trump campaign filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State on Wednesday to isolate late mailed ballots, while the Republican Party called on the Federal Court to decide to retain the seven-day period, as long as the ballots are late to the election day.

The deadline for receiving mailed ballots varies from state to state. In 28 states, ballots must be received on election day, but in 22 states and the District of Columbia, they need to be postmarked before election day, but they can arrive later.

President Donald Trump erroneously argued that the election results should be announced on November 3, when several major states, including Pennsylvania, will spend more than one night calculating a large number of absentee votes. The results reported on election night are always informal and will be later certified by the states.

But in the Supreme Court’s Wisconsin ruling, the Federal Court of Appeals’ decision to accept votes before Election Day remains unchanged, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh seems to be consistent with Trump’s thinking.

Kavanaugh wrote that the states have set deadlines for mailing out on election day, “to avoid confusion and suspected misconduct when thousands of absentee ballots flow in after election day and may subvert the election results.”

He added: “Those countries also hope to announce the results of the election as soon as possible on or after election night.”

Rick Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine and CNN analyst, wrote in a column in the Washington Post this week that Kavanaugh’s views may not matter. However, if the issue ends up in the court, “there are good reasons to worry about the court’s protection of voting rights and the integrity of the vote.”

In a decision in Pennsylvania on Wednesday, the court refused to expedite the trial of the case, which is approaching the election. Some conservative judges in the court suggested that people were skeptical of the Pennsylvania court’s decision to extend the mailing deadline. In a statement accompanying the order, Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Neil Gollach jointly stated that the court cannot intervene before this election, but added, ” The state Supreme Court’s ruling is very likely to violate the Federal Constitution.”

No other judges commented on this, although the order indicated that there may be more opinions. The court said that the latest judge of the court, Amy Coney Barrett, did not vote in Pennsylvania or North Carolina cases due to the need for a quick resolution.

The threat of diplomatic election interference

Senator Marco Rubio, the acting chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, issued a stern warning on Wednesday: Now is the time to guard against interference in foreign elections.

The Florida Republican said on Twitter: “Most of the disinformation attacks prepared by our enemies are carried out around Election Day.” “They may come faster than they are discovered and called, so it is wise to say , The more absurd the request, the more likely it is to be influenced by foreign countries.”

National Intelligence Director John Ratcliffe said in a statement that Iran and Russia have obtained voter registration information and that Iran is responsible for threatening emails sent to voters claiming to be from far-right groups. This is Rubio. Warning.

These e-mails have been sent to voters in Florida, and members of the Florida Congress delegation heard a briefing on interference from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence this week.

CNN’s Ariane de Vogue, Paul P. Murphy, Curt Devine and Zachary Cohen contributed to this report.




Source link