Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Ballots Can’t Be Tossed Out over Mismatching Signature

Breitbart ^ | October 23 2020

[knighthawk]

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court ruled unanimously Friday on a key concern surrounding an avalanche of mail-in ballots in the presidential battleground state, prohibiting counties from rejecting ballots because the voter’s signature on it may not resemble their signature on their registration form.

Two Republican justices joined five Democratic justices in the decision.

The verdict was a victory for the state’s top election official, Kathy Boockvar, a Democrat who had asked the court to back her up in a legal dispute with President Donald Trump’s campaign and Republican lawmakers.

[snarkytart]

PA is toast for us with all these pro fraud rulings there, I think.Unless we appeal ASAP.

[DoughtyOne]

SCOTUS, fast track...

Of course with Roberts there, who knows...

[Beowulf9]

But they can record just one vote by that person. Be interesting to see if that person voted for two different Presidents.

[DarthVader]

Wait till ACB comes on the court. This will be challenged again.

[Flick Lives]

Last sentence is critical before meltdown ensues...

“In her court filing, Boockvar had said that any such rejections pose “a grave risk of disenfranchisement on an arbitrary and wholly subjective basis,” and without any opportunity for a voter to verify their signature before their ballot is disqualified.”

[CondorFlight]

So why have the signatures, if not to verify the ballots?

[Principled]

Well just what CAN disqualify a ballot?

Can we send some in from Arkansas?

[montag813]

Of course with Roberts there, who knows...

Didn't Roberts already rule 4-4 that Virginia can accept "ballots" until 2056?

[reg45]

Then there is no need for any signature.

[montag813]

Can’t our side blackmail Roberts too?

[Vaduz]

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court ruled unanimously by fat Tony,2 gun Jake,fast money Frank .........................................

[Buckeye McFrog]

Wait till ACB comes on the court. This will be challenged again.

Yup. She'll be the fifth vote to stop it, which will pretty much guarantee riots on Nov. 4.

It's why Schumer was wigging-out trying to get her to recuse from any cases about the election.

I think after last night the Dems know that Joe ain't gonna make it. So they are preparing themselves for four more years of "elected, not selected" and "resist" and all of the street theater (and fundraising) that comes along with it.

[hawkaw]

So how do they verify it is the correct person voting and the person only voted once? Is there a special code or number?

[Buckeye McFrog]

“selected, not elected”. Can’t even keep their stale slogans straight.

[DarthVader]

Good let them riot we have new riot crushing asymmetric warfare technologies to test.

[Midwesterner53]

Barrett should be there first thing Tuesday am.

[FR33DOM4ME]

I would suppose this means that you cannot outright reject a ballot because a signature does not match but you would have to contact the voter in order to seek a signature verification.

[NonValueAdded]

WTF???

[carton253]

Wait until Amy is sworn in.