Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Appeals court rules Pennsylvania date requirement for mail-in ballots is unconstitutional
Washington Examiner ^ | August 26, 2025 11:48 am | Jack Birle

Posted on 08/26/2025 12:35:50 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that a Pennsylvania requirement for mail-in ballots with missing or incorrect dates to be tossed out is unconstitutional, upholding a lower district court ruling.

A panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a March ruling from a federal district court in Pennsylvania that found the requirement did “not pass constitutional muster” in a lawsuit filed around the 2022 election. The Republican National Committee had appealed the lower court ruling, but a panel of three judges appointed by former presidents Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush rejected the appeal.

“We must determine if the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s requirement that mail-in ballots that arrive in undated or misdated return envelopes be discarded complies with our Constitution,” the opinion written by Judge D. Brooks Smith said.

“Weighing the burden that practice imposes on Pennsylvanians’ constitutional right to vote against the State’s interest in the practice, the balance of the scales leads us to hold that it does not comply with our Constitution,” added the opinion by the Bush-appointed judge.

The lawsuit, which was brought in Nov. 2022 by a group of Pennsylvania voters, now-Sen. John Fetterman’s (D-PA) campaign, along with the Democratic Party’s House and Senate campaign wings, argued the state’s date requirement for mail-in ballots violated the Civil Rights Act along with the First and 14th Amendments.

“The date on a mail ballot envelope thus has no bearing on a voter’s qualifications and serves no purpose other than to erect barriers to qualified voters exercising their fundamental constitutional right to vote,” the Democrat-led lawsuit alleged.

The RNC could appeal the panel’s decision to the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit or appeal to the...

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

1 posted on 08/26/2025 12:35:50 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Retards....


2 posted on 08/26/2025 12:36:27 PM PDT by Paladin2 (YMMV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

You need time stamp machines at drop boxes.


3 posted on 08/26/2025 12:37:30 PM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday”... that many are Above The Law.


4 posted on 08/26/2025 12:38:00 PM PDT by Paladin2 (YMMV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

When are they going to start randomly piss testing these RAT “judges”?


5 posted on 08/26/2025 12:39:16 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Vanity Fair. The Official Rag of Far-Left Liberal HATE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Put aside the date on the envelope. Does Pennsylvania count mail in ballots that arrive after Election Day?


6 posted on 08/26/2025 12:44:01 PM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Don’t diss retards they have more on the ball than dimocraps.


7 posted on 08/26/2025 12:44:38 PM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that a Pennsylvania requirement for mail-in ballots with missing or incorrect dates to be tossed out is unconstitutional”

Just more Regal Branch Judges proving they now belong to the Demoncratic Party.


8 posted on 08/26/2025 12:48:46 PM PDT by antidemoncrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

‘Does Anyone Else Think This Is Whack?’


9 posted on 08/26/2025 12:52:25 PM PDT by sopo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

We don’t need drop boxes. We never have, except to stuff with fraudalent ballots..


10 posted on 08/26/2025 12:53:31 PM PDT by silent majority rising (When it is dark enough, men see the stars. Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Appeals court rules Pennsylvania date requirement for mail-in ballots is unconstitutional

It still astonishes me that anyone in Pennsylvania even bothered to pursue this requirement in the mail-in voting process.

A mail-in ballot already has a date on it -- the postmark.

11 posted on 08/26/2025 1:01:29 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("Although my eyes were open, they might just as well be closed.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum; CFW

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca3.124786/gov.uscourts.ca3.124786.147.0.pdf

On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania
(District Court No. 1:22-cv-00340)
District stooge: DisHonorable Susan Paradise Baxter [Benedict Obama stooge]
__________________________
Case: 25-1644 Document: 147 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/26/2025
4
Argued July 1, 2025
Before: Patty Shwartz [Benedict Obama stooge], Arianna J. Freeman [AutoPen Biden stooge], and D. Brooks Smith [Smirking Chimp stooge], Circuit stooges

D. Brooks Smith, the Dubya stooge, hung on before taking senior status in order to transfer his open seat to a Biden stooge, Cindy K. Chung [voice vote].


12 posted on 08/26/2025 1:04:34 PM PDT by kiryandil (No one in AZ that voted for Trump voted for Gallego )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Opinion here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca3.124786/gov.uscourts.ca3.124786.147.0.pdf
The panel is D. Brooks Smith (G.W. Bush), Patty Shwartz (Obama), and Arriana J. Feeman (Biden). So, this excrement was written by a Bushie and two Rat judges.
13 posted on 08/26/2025 1:04:56 PM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

en banc:

2 Dubya judges
3 Benedict Obama stooges
3 AutoPen Joe stooges
5 Trump judges

6 stooges to 5 judges, with 2 Dubya fence-sitters.

14 posted on 08/26/2025 1:08:40 PM PDT by kiryandil (No one in AZ that voted for Trump voted for Gallego )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

D. Brooks Smith, the Dubya stooge, hung on before taking senior status in order to transfer his open seat to a Biden stooge, Cindy K. Chung [voice vote].


15 posted on 08/26/2025 1:09:10 PM PDT by kiryandil (No one in AZ that voted for Trump voted for Gallego )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; All

In short, the same rules for getting income tax returns filed on time don’t apply to mail in ballots.


16 posted on 08/26/2025 1:11:41 PM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

OF Course... they did. Fraud Alert.


17 posted on 08/26/2025 1:15:13 PM PDT by mfish13 (Elections have Consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

A possible fallout from this could be that a firm deadline is the election date, and if there is no requirement for a date on the ballot then all ballots received after the election date get tossed.


18 posted on 08/26/2025 1:15:59 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage? (Drain the Swamp. Build the Wall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

If voting has legal rules that must be followed, to help prevent voting fraud, and then those rules cannot be upheld, because someone not following the rules is allowed to vote anyway, then the risk of voter fraud is being allowed to be put above adherence to the law, voting fraud is not prevented, and the civil rights of all legal voters are denied, because the security of their vote is not protected; and by writ of the Pennsylvania court CANNOT BE PROTECTED because the manner of protecting it is deemed, by that court, to be “unconstitutional”.

This needs to go to SCOTUS.


19 posted on 08/26/2025 1:19:13 PM PDT by Wuli (uire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

So the votes of citizens will be diluted with cheat-by-mail-in ballots.


20 posted on 08/26/2025 1:22:58 PM PDT by HandBasketHell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson