قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / The Federal Court of Appeals believes that late ballots in Minnesota may be discarded

The Federal Court of Appeals believes that late ballots in Minnesota may be discarded



The case was originally filed by voters in a pair of electoral colleges of President Donald Trump, James Carson and Eric Lucero of Minnesota.In addition, the Trump campaign and Republican state legislative candidates Petition to the State Supreme Court Isolate ballots that arrived after voting earlier this week.

The Trump campaign used Minnesota as a potential flip target earlier in the cycle, but lost only 1.5 percentage points in 2016, but autumn seems not to be on the battlefield. However, the state’s campaign has already begun late, with Trump and Joe Biden both holding events in Minnesota on Friday.

Former President George W. Bush appointed Judge Bobby Shepherd (Bobby Shepherd) and Trump appointed Stephen Glass (L. Former President Barack Obama) The appointed Judge Jane Kelly dissent.

In addition to separating certain types of ballots, there is another layer of complexity in this case: the court recommended that if the consent order is invalid, only ballots in the presidential election can be thrown away. The court̵

7;s order stated that the ballots should be “separated in a way that allows the electors of the president to vote individually… If a court with jurisdiction makes a final order and determines that the ballot is invalid, it will be deleted from the total number of votes… or Illegal counting.”

Simon’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Democrats in the state criticized the ruling and urged voters to submit their votes in person.

Minnesota Democrat-Peasant-Labor Party Chairman Ken Martin said in a statement: “This kind of absurd and misleading opinion will discard the rules that have been enacted since the voting in September.” “I urge the people of Minnesota. Return any unfinished in-person mailed ballots as soon as possible. The Republicans attack your voting right because the vote has the power to change our state and country.”

Shepherd and Grasz pointed out in the ruling that their decision may confuse voters, and election day is only a few days away.

“The consequences of this order will not cause us loss. We recognize and understand the voter chaos, election management issues, and public confidence in elections related to the voting principle,” he quoted the doctrine of the Federal Court Generally should not break election rules Election day is approaching.

They continued: “Having said that, we believe that the challenge posed by this ruling is more desirable than the post-election situation. In this case, mailed votes received after the statutory deadline are either different from those received on time. Of the ballots are mixed together, or voided without prior warning,”.

This is the second case in a few days in a row. The Federal Court recommended that even after the election day, it is possible to default on overdue votes.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court refused to expedite the Republican Party’s challenge to Pennsylvania’s extension of the deadline, but retained the option to rule the case after election day.

In Pennsylvania’s rejected statement, Judge Samuel Alito pointed out in the Pennsylvania case that the Commonwealth Secretary issued guidance to local election officials early on Wednesday to close the polls After the ballots received before the deadline of November 6 are separated, the door may be decided after the election.

Alito’s statement implies that he believes that even if a ruling is made after election day, these votes can still be thrown away. “The court’s rejection of the acceleration motion does not deny the request for the court to order the separation of votes received after election day so that if the state Supreme Court’s decision is eventually overturned, targeted remedial measures will be taken,” he said. Write.


Source link