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.
Posted on 03/23/2026 6:53:07 AM PDT by CFW
At 10:00 this morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the issue of ballots arriving after election day.
QUESTION PRESENTED:
The federal election-day statutes-2 U.S.C. § 7, 2 U.S.C. § 1, and 3 U.S.C. § 1-set the Tuesday after the first Monday in November in certain years as the "election" day for federal offices. Like all other States, Mississippi requires that ballots for federal offices be cast-marked and submitted to election officials-by that day. And like most other States, Mississippi allows some of those timely cast ballots (mail-in absentee ballots, in Mississippi's case) to be counted if they are received by election officials a short time after election day (in Mississippi, within 5 business days after election day). Miss. Code Ann. § 23-15- 637(1)(a).
In the decision below, the Fifth Circuit held that the federal election-day statutes require that ballots be both cast by voters and received by election officials by election day and thus preempt Mississippi's law.
The question presented is whether the federal election-day statutes preempt a state law that allows ballots that are cast by federal election day to be received by election officials after that day.
If you'd like to listen to the arguments, audio is available at:
(Excerpt) Read more at supremecourt.gov ...
|
|
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. |
SCOTUS ping!
this is super important to us voters in California!! yes- i had on my calendar to listen.
How can there be any question about counting ballots that arrive after Election Day? It is ludicrous. Dems: “How many votes do we need to win? Start printing!”
How can there be any question about counting ballots that arrive after Election Day? It is ludicrous. Dems: “How many votes do we need to win? Start printing!”
You’d think it would be common sense.
Justice Thomas with the first question.
actually it used to be it needed to be postmarked NO LATER than Election day.
This counting of mail-in and absentee ballots after the election - up to 14 days in California - has got to stop.
It is one of the key ways Democrats use to steal elections - two weeks after the Republican has been declared the winner.
An overview of the case, lower court rulings, and the parties involved can be read here:
“Court to hear argument in case that could have significant impact on 2026 elections”
“This counting of mail-in and absentee ballots after the election - up to 14 days in California - has got to stop.”
California gives itself more like 30 days (not just 14) to obtain the desired election outcomes.
After-the-fact “ballot harvesting” takes time, you know.
Paul Clement* is now up for the Republican National Committee. He is good.
The attorney for Mississippi was a bit flustered and seemed to be unsure of his position.
Let’s see how Clement does under questioning.
Once again Justice Thomas has the first question.
*(Paul Clement is a preeminent Supreme Court litigator with over 100 argued cases, specializing in high-stakes conservative victories regarding gun rights, religious liberty, and administrative law. His most notable wins include the landmark Second Amendment ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) and the religious freedom case Kennedy v. Bremerton School District)
Fork the Supremacist Court. The Freaky gods who control Americans.
The west coast is all election fraud, all the time
Justice Sam Alito just dropped the mic on liberals who want us to receive endless mail-in ballots after election *day*
“We have LOTS of phrases that involve two words, the last of which, the second of which is DAY. Labor DAY, Memorial DAY, George Washington’s birthDAY, Independence DAY, birth DAY, and election DAY!”
“And they’re all particular DAYS.”
“So if we start with that, if I have nothing more to look at than the phrase election day, I think this is the DAY in which everything is going to take place, or almost everything.”
The competitive forces involved in elections are Left v Right AND Honest v Dishonest.
Concentrating everyone's efforts on election DAY puts everyone on their toes, puts a huge floodlight on the process of voting, and keeps everything above-board and in plain view. FOR A SHORT, intense period. Very effective, very practical to do, very inexpensive, relatively speaking, security-wise.
With craziness like forever-deadlines and mail-in ballots, all kinds of shenanigans and mendaciousness and tom-foolery can take place, all of it illegal, invisible, never to be discovered, never to be accounted for.
That's argument No. 1.
Argument No. 2 is that Rats are FOR mail in ballotting and extended deadlines, and EVERYTHING the Rats are for is corrosive and inimical to decent, lawful, orderly, moral, human life.
I am not sure how the ruling will go but I have a feeling it will be based on the fact it is the states and not the populace who elect the president. In this I am going by the Constitution and not later “Election Day statutes.”
There is also this,
“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”
That does not apply to the popular vote.
I think the fifth circuit erred in deciding that “Fifth Circuit held that the federal election-day statutes require that ballots be both cast by voters and received by election officials by election day and thus preempt Mississippi’s law” I don’t know if that decision took into account the absentee votes allowed under Federal law.
If state statutes regarding absentee ballot have regulations equal to or stricter than Federal law usually such would be permitted unless expressly prohibited under Federal law. If they are more lenient then it comes back to the question of who determines the election laws of the states. The states themselves or congress. If federal legislation is silent on the matter it is the states.
I think more effort should be made to revoke the so called “motor voter” laws since those are federal laws. They really aren’t needed after all the whole argument against voter ID is how difficult it is for a certain demographic to obtain other forms of ID. So if they don’t need a DL they don’t need to be able to register at the DMV.
IT appears that the federal government does not have the authority to dictate to the states how they determine whether a vote has been cast in time to be counted. That would be in the state’s statutes. The main problem we saw during Covid is when state courts contradicted legislation that did restrict when ballots shall be counted.
PS. If memory serves some courts have decided it is o.k. for election supervisors to ignore whether mail in ballots have been postmarked by the date mandated by state law. Don’t know if that was part of the suit here but I don’t see how requiring the ballot to have been sent by a certain date interferes with any voting rights.
Paul Clement is very smart. The interesting thing about Clement is he argues from memory and uses no notes. He was the solicitor general under Bush 43. Went on to work in a few law firms, but left Kirkland and Ellis after they stopped defending second amendment cases. He’s a very principled guy and not all of his positions are those people on this site might like.
“Court appears ready to overturn state law allowing for late-arriving mail-in ballots”
Paul Clement is good. He is very eloquent and precise when he speaks.
BTW, the court has indicated that it may release opinions on Wednesday, March 25, at 10 a.m. EDT.
It won’t be today’s case of course, but it may be some of the more interesting cases that are pending.
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.