Posted on 11/29/2020 8:25:33 AM PST by Presbyterian Reporter
MY COMMENTARY ON PA SUPREME COURT RULING RE ACT 77 on NOV 28
I am generally opposed to mail-in voting because I see too many ways it can be abused as opposed to VIP. (Vote In Person).
If I lived in Pennsylvania I would feel disenfranchised after reading these PA Supreme Court opinions issued yesterday.
Here are the links to the PA Supreme Court rulings:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/68%20MAP%202020%20Concurring%20Statement%20(J.%20Wecht)final.pdf?cb=2
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/68%20MAP%202020%20Concurring%20and%20Dissenting%20Statement%20(C.J.%20Saylor).pdf?cb=2
Justice Wecht argues in her concurring opinion the 'public' should have known that Act 77 had a proviso in the law stating that a person had 180 days to object.
Well, if I were a 'commoner' in the Commonwealth of PA, how am I expected to know that Act 77 which made absentee voting available to anyone was in direct contradiction of the PA Constitution?
JUDGE McCULLOUGH in in her Nov 27 injunction ruling goes through the detail of what it takes to amend the PA Constitution. Namely, an amendment has to be approved by the Legislature two times and then the amendment has to be sent to the voters for their approval. What is important here is that ‘We The People’ have the final say when it comes to amending the PA Constitution. Link to her ruling is here: Memorandum-Opinion-Filed.pdf (marklevinshow.com)
If a were a 'commoner' in PA, I would think that Act 77 was A-OK, when the Legislature, PA GOV, and PA SOS told everyone: "Guess what kiddos, from now on you can vote absentee and you no longer have to have a reason to do so. No excuse is needed"
Thus, today I would be a very disgruntled PA 'commoner', who generally opposes mail-in voting. I may be even more than disgruntled since I just found out that I had been lied to by the Republican Majority PA Legislature and the Democrat PA Governor when they told me ACT 77 was A-OK and perfectly legal when it was enacted October 2019.
Justice Saylor even admits the voters have been lied to: “As the majority relates, there has been too much good-faith reliance, by the electorate, on the no-excuse mail-in voting regime created by Act 77 to warrant judicial consideration of the extreme and untenable remedies proposed by Appellees.”
Am I incorrect in saying the Pennsylvania voters have had their equal protection of the laws violated by the Pennsylvania LEGISLATIVE, EXECUTIVE and JUDICIAL BRANCHES of government in that state?.
I believe it was Ben Franklin who once said: “It’s a Republic if you can keep it”.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/68%20MAP%202020%20Concurring%20Statement%20(J.%20Wecht)final.pdf?cb=2
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/68%20MAP%202020%20Concurring%20and%20Dissenting%20Statement%20(C.J.%20Saylor).pdf?cb=2
Memorandum-Opinion-Filed.pdf (marklevinshow.com)
trying to get clickable links—
You wanna comment? Put it chat where all vanities belong.
The PA Supreme Court is a kangaroo court. I live in this state. They have wholesale violated the state and federal constitutions repeatedly. The separation of powers means nothing to them at all.
To get relief I PA you will need the feds or the state legislature to get relief. The PA Supremes will strike down anything in the state courts that would be a threat to Biden or any republican winning.
Note: Kathy Boockvar first filed this July 13 2020. it was the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and Gov. Tom Wolf that held it up until October
Page 3 of the last link On the Mail in ballots ruling late October
"I reluctantly conclude that there is simply not enough time at this late date to decide the question before the election. That does not mean, however, that the state court decision must escape our review. Although the Court denies the motion to expedite, the petition for certiorari remains before us, and if it is granted, the case can then be decided under a shortened schedule"
- US Supreme court justice Alito
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-542_i3dj.pdf
If I understand what you are saying, this issue of the voters not being involved in amending the PA Constitution has already been to the US Supreme Court and that is where John Roberts joined with the 3 liberal justices and did nothing.
Correct?
yes
What’s this about Biden winning “only 5 Democrat cities”? Didn’t he also win New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Houston, Dallas, San Diego, San Francisco, Miami, etc.?
They are not the cities that won it for Biden. Of course NY and Cali went for Biden. They have voted Dem decades.
But the MASSIVE FRAUD in Atlanta, Philly, Detroit, Milwaukee and Las Vegas are what put Biden ahead of Trump, by swinging those states over.
Otherwise, they would have been Trump states like Ohio.
“Justice Wecht argues in her concurring opinion the ‘public’ should have known that Act 77 had a proviso in the law stating that a person had 180 days to object.”
The PA SC judges are partisan hacks. My analysis, as a non-lawyer, is simple.
“Act 77” was passed like a simple law, with a severability clause. The law, on it’s face, INCLUDING the 180 day limit, has been unconstitutionally implemented in this election. Everyone involved in passing this knew the constitutional requirement to making amendments and thus also passed a bill at the same time, beginning the two-session, public comment, electorate vote process.
The public should know that the fully lawful requirements of their state constitution can not be trampled over by any government entity.
Pennsylvania Ping!
Please ping me with articles of interest.
FReepmail me to be added to the list.
Legislature had no power to pass an unconstitutional law. Period. Regardless of any time limit expressed.
The pa supreme court has declared itself a kangaroo court with this decision.
Last stop USSC. Then game on.
Well, if I were a ‘commoner’ in the Commonwealth of PA, how am I expected to know that Act 77 which made absentee voting available to anyone was in direct contradiction of the PA Constitution?
“””“Act 77” was passed like a simple law, with a severability clause. The law, on it’s face, INCLUDING the 180 day limit, has been unconstitutionally implemented in this election. Everyone involved in passing this knew the constitutional requirement to making amendments and thus also passed a bill at the same time, beginning the two-session, public comment, electorate vote process.”””
It seems most of the Conservative Bloggers and News Media are looking for FRAUD.
I agree with you.
FRAUD upon the voters in Pennsylvania is staring everybody in the face.
The Pennsylvania LEGISLATURE definitely knew that the words in ACT 77 were directly contrary to the words in the PA Constitution when the LEGISLATURE passed and sent it on to the Pennsylvania GOVERNOR for signature.
How many PA LEGISLATORS stood up and said: “I can’t vote for ACT 77 as it directly opposes the words in the PA Constitution?”
The Pennsylvania GOVERNOR definitely knew that the words in ACT 77 were directly contrary to the words in the PA Constitution when the GOVERNOR signed ACT 77 and put it into effect.
Did the PA GOVERNOR stand up and say: “I can’t sign ACT 77 as it directly opposes the words in the PA Constitution?”
We all know the answer. Both the LEGISLATURE and the GOVERNOR were silent because they were committing FRAUD upon the people in Pennsylvania.
Both the LEGISLATURE and the GOVERNOR violated their oath of office to uphold the Pennsylvania Constitution when they passed and signed ACT 77 in October 2019.
And the PA JUDICIARY is complicit in this FRAUD because they claim it is not their responsibility to take a look at the Constitutional validity of any new law.
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.