Two cases which are somewhat related increases the chances that one gets cert.
This case might actually get consideration by the supreme court.
If it gets consideration by the supreme court—imho the supremes will rule against mail in balloting.
But this is a long shot. The courts have shown an unwillingness to get involved in the electorial process. Roberts would be decidedly against the supremes weighing in on this and if they did he would be in favor of allowing ballot harvesting—as would all the democrats on the court.
There are still enough conservatives on the court to make a majority. But ruling against ballot harvesting would take some spine.
Mail-in voting another one of Nancy Pelosi’s Scams
Mail-in voting needs to be eliminated b/c of blatant fraud - vote harvesting (legal in California) needs to go too, which is related to mail-in ballots.
One day, pencil and paper. Period.
My neighbor received three mail-in ballots for the 2020 election at her home, one for someone who had lived their 10 years previously.
“Fair and Freest Elections Ever” ...my a**.
This is kind of a stretch. The article also mentions “manner” which is an option against “place”.
They’re better ways to argue against mail-in voting, like citizenship verification.
Mail-in Voting Is Unsafe and Unsecure just the way the democrats like it
Most requests are ignored IN CONFERENCE. All go to conference. Very few are accepted. Most don’t even merit a word.
Just another stupid case that will not be “discussed” on Jan 6. Just rejected. Like the other case you mention, the defendants didn’t even bother to respond. The defendants think it is a waste of their time to respond UNLESS the Court directs otherwise. Which hasn’t happened.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-414.html
There are the disabled and seniors that have legit reasons to use mail-in. The key is for the state legislatures to step up and control the process (i.e., get off their butts and actually do something useful).
In GA in the 2022 Nov. General Election, only about 6% of the votes were mail-in. In other words, about 15 out of 16 votes were in-person, only 1 out of 16 were mail-in. Courts upheld the 2021 voter laws cutting back on mail-in, upheld ID required to vote, upheld elimination of almost all drop boxes.
Courts are letting state legislatures tighten up on voting requirments. Dems and the ACLU hate it. The key is getting legislators to do something.
Mail-in voting = VOTER FRAUD
It’s not rocket science...
I don’t think the mail voting will get tossed as there has to be mail in ballots for military members deployed of stationed away from their permanent residence and absentee ballots for those away from home. I understand if someone is at their residence and can vote at a specific locality but chooses to mail in their ballot is different from absentee voting but I don’t see the liberal and swing voting supremes stopping mail-in voting.
Constitutionality the word the democrats hate most it’s the first on their kill list.
“...SCOTUS to Consider Taking Case on Constitutionality of Mail-In Voting ...”
N O W ???????????????
Who woke them up??
I hate mail in and would ban it . . . but . . . Isn’t a post office box a “place”?
The Brunsons are serial pro-se litigators, and they have lost before.
Both of these cases will be denied.
Also keep in mind the Delaware supreme court ruled that the mail in balloting in DE was unconstitutional and Delaware’s constitution has similar wording as PA.
I wouldn’t get my hopes up. I don’t see SCOTUS stepping into the powers of the state legislatures. If people don’t want mail-in ballots, then elect a legislature that will amend their state constitutions. The remedy is already in place: and I think that is how they will rule.
One place, one day, one methodology (paper and ink) would be ideal. Then clean voter rolls.
Thousands of cases get dates for conference - in fact, every single one that doesn’t get rejected for obvious filing issues such as way-out-of-time pro se prisoner petitions gets slated for conference. These will be “discussed” at conference by being placed on the deny list after conference with many others.