[Sacajaweau]

There is a received date. This is not a seal. The date they’re talking about is absolutely unnecessary.

[EEGator]

You know what this site needs, more hysterical posters...

[Alberta's Child]

Exactly. And what precipitated this legal challenge in the first place is that the Pennsylvania legislators who drafted the law requiring a hand-written date for a mail-in ballot were such idiots that the law didn’t specify WHICH date was to be written on it.

So under the law as it was written, election officials were required to accept dozens of mail-in ballots even when they had dates on them that were clearly a farce like July 4, 1776 or December 7, 1941 or even a date far into the future.

[Roadrunner383]

“There is a received date. This is not a seal. The date they’re talking about is absolutely unnecessary.”

Yep. This is a case of over-reach by the courts, however, it’s something where there is a documented date received. Hard to see how a hand-written date would make any difference one way or the other. Again, though, seems like the courts need to butt out.