Posted on 11/04/2020 11:24:40 AM PST by Kid Shelleen
---SNIP---
To be fair, not all of these crucial state Supreme Court rulings have been decided along party lines. On October 23, for example, Republican justices joined a unanimous decision prohibiting county election boards from rejecting mail-in ballots with signatures that do not match the voter’s signature on file.
However, the Court’s most consequential decision — extending the mail-in ballot deadline well after state statute — smacks of partisan politics and preempts the state Legislature’s lawmaking authority. While tasked to interpret and apply the law, five justices instead rewrote the law.
(Excerpt) Read more at broadandliberty.com ...
**** Pennsy Ping ****
Note to democrats: You can’t declare victory using fraudulent votes!
Can we expect a win against that in the SCOTUS followed by a recount in PA?
Mark Levin said he talked to a member of the PA legislature last week, and he didn’t want to do anything.
The fact that it is “even” close informs me all I need to know.
So called Republicans that couldn’t be bothered to vote don’t deserve my love and all the work I put in over the last six months.
To my Democrat friends, you are lying thieves who are never ever to be trusted.
Everytime you are on the losing end you inject uncertainty
Fascinating in all this is the very states both sides believed were the states needed just so happen to be in contention
So, FU y’all
Tards...
The PA Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over election law as determined by the State Legislature. For God’s sake why are we letting ourselves be conned into pretending that it does?
The Democrats seized control of the Supreme Court by taking advantage of the off-year elections and at-large selection which let Philadelphia select all of the judges. Those tricks didn’t work for the Legislature which represents voters from across the state and is thus Republican controlled.
If we can’t stop the Democrat’s voter fraud in PA through any other means the Republican Legislature must exercise its authority to directly select the electors and ignore any illegitimate objections from the State Supreme Court.
Republicans have to start fighting back. Now would be a good time.
How is the second one more consequential than the first? Allowing ballots where the signatures don’t match seems as consequential to me as anything..
I thought the SCOTUS had already weighed in on that..
What if an organic movement started like the Trump parades but patriots left work and headed to DC to protest there and all the media outlets, truckers stopped etc.. it would bring the left to their Knees.
You are right. I missed that Roberts-the-rat already ruled with the Dims to let the PA supreme court ruling stand.
It’s Trump who has standing to sue as the one with a justiciable wrong.
sigh... wish I was wrong. I also wish I knew what they have on John Roberts
Well, from what I've recently read on the web, there's a simple explanation: The Democrats in that state shrewdly put state Supreme Court elections in the off-year election cycle (in non-Presidential election years). Democrat politicians know there's FAR less voter interest in non-Presidential election years, so it's FAR easier for Pennsylvania Democrats to pull their election scams in those election off-years (very few people pay attention). So that's how you end up with a state Supreme Court with 5 Democrat Justices and only 2 Republicans and it seems that majority could be in place for at least another 10 years!
Republicans asleep at the wheel. Nice job, guys!
If they do not have anything on Roberts he is psychologically unfit to be Chief Justice, seeing his role as primarily as if he is supposed to try to “insure” “bipartisan” and “non-controversial” decisions, as if the twisted legal contortions he makes to that do not matter (like on Obamacare).
His real hand will be shown more once Amy Barret is sitting on the cases.
But the legislature could have stopped them from counting all ballots.
It is an act of God’s mercy that she was confirmed before the election.
Sadly this makes a lot of sense and takes us back to all politics is local.
-PJ
Just as an aside on this point. I'm a PA resident, and voted at the polls yesterday a.m. When I went to get my ballot and be signed in, I noted that my signature on file was the digital signature on my driver's license. When you apply your signature to your DL, it's with a fat stylus on a digital pad like you sign for a credit card in a lot of places. The space is very small, and being of eastern European descent like a lot of western Pennsylvanians, I have a long surname (11 letters). For my signature on my driver's license, I had to compress my signature, which was further distorted by the thick digital stylus, so the "signature on file," looks significantly different than my "payroll" signature or how I would otherwise sign my name on a check, letter, or other physical form with more space and a finer point pen. Quite honestly, if I were to compare the two, I would be very suspicious as to whether or not they were from the same person.
I'm just throwing that out there for the sake of discussion.
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.