Posted on 03/24/2026 11:31:25 AM PDT by simpson96
Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that a legal theory supported by the Republican National Committee in a case related to mail-in ballots “imperils a lot of different things.”
Jackson noted during oral arguments in the case on Monday that election practices have changed over time, which she said undermines the idea that there was ever a consistent practice across all states.
“It's been changing throughout the course in a way that undermines the notion that there was one consistent practice first of all, or that Congress's law, the meaning of Election Day in the federal statutes, somehow was tied to what the state's practices were about that,” Jackson said. “I mean, I think this is your original point that there were lots of different practices and so to the extent we're saying, ‘oh, you could only look at Election Day in the federal statute to mean exactly what the states were doing back at that time.’ This imperils a lot of different things, not just post-Election Day ballot deadlines.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Well, my opinion is you shouldn’t be on the Supreme Court in the first place. She should be greeting people at Walmart and maybe not even do well at that.
Tell me you're an imbecile without telling me you're an imbecile.
The right to bear arms is in the Bill of Rights. Yet, liberals have no problem piling restriction upon restriction against gun ownership. But abortion (which is not in the constitution), and voting (which is), no restrictions whatsover can be mandated.
“Tell me you’re an imbecile without telling me you’re an imbecile.”
The thread is young, but you win, in advance.
Tell it to the IRS if your return isn’t postmarked by April 15.
Sorry ass moulinyan.
Oughta be working in a Burger King.
Mrs. Potatohead.
She gives me hope that my public education and judo marketing degree combined with my failing grades in English grammar and syntax can land me a SCJ seat. On my worse day for ignorance and stupidity I would look brilliant next to her.
Can’t we send this idiot back to Africa. She doesn’t even know what a woman is and she wants to tell US how the cow ate the cabbage. Geez.
She wouldn’t even know what a ballot is if a whitey hadn’t taught her.
She’s a legit retard.
She makes Kamala look like an Einstein...
化炭寺
But with votes, the possibility for hijinks is infinitely greater. You have a congressional election, and, late on election night, you see you are 85 votes short. Now, with the proper advanced preparation, you can take 100 votes down to the post office on Wednesday and have them postmarked for election day. That way you know you only need to submit ballots for 100 centenarians, instead of maybe 1000 without knowing the tabulations. Is it easy to backdate postmarks? I don't know. Will postal employees be willing to be accomplices? I don't know. But, knowing what I know about human nature, such a scheme is far from impossible.
More likely that Kagan and Sotomayor will side with the majority now.
If SCOTUS wanted to take full advantage of this case to restore proper election law doctrine, here is what it should recognize and then do:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.
In summary, Congress can override state election law regarding manner, time and place for House elections, but only place regarding Senate elections.
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Article II Section 1 Clause 3:
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
In summary, Congress can only override the date and time of Electoral College elections.
In this case, a state can extend the mail-in ballot deadline for state elections, but the Constitution gives Congress the power to choose the time of Electoral College elections, which is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Via the Article VI Supremacy clause, states cannot change this date for the Electoral College. This means that extending mail-in ballot receipt for presidential elections is not allowed by the states.
Similarly, Congress has the power to set the time for House and Senate elections, which is now the same as Electoral College elections. Again, states have no power to extend the Congressionally established time via late mail-in ballot receipt.
-PJ
Two observations:
Ketanji is not even qualified to fetch coffee for a court clerk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.