Posted on 09/23/2024 9:17:54 AM PDT by DallasBiff
A ruling about whether Mississippi can count postmarked mail ballots that arrive after Election Day could have a "national impact," according to a former federal prosecutor
On Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is to hear oral argument in RNC v. Wetzel, a lawsuit filed by the Republican National Convention to disallow the counting of ballots that are received after Election Day in Mississippi.
Mississippi counts mail-in ballots that are received up to five business days after an election as long as they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Writing on her Substack blog on Monday, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance said that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' judgment could have a widespread impact
"Remember, this is the Fifth Circuit, a court with a propensity for reaching maximalist results when a more narrow ruling would have served and enabling the Supreme Court to go off on a tangent, like it did when it reversed Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs case, which also came out of Mississippi," Vance wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
It seems to me the US Constitution is very clear about the election being on one day.
I receive a lot of mail with no postmark,
or with no date in the postmark.
Democrats don’t go by the rules they are above them.
This is the kind of thing that makes voting harder or impossible for military members abroad.
“It seems to me the US Constitution is very clear about the election being on one day.”
You would be wrong:
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”
Only the electoral college must be on a single uniform day:
“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.”
I would not trust the 5th circuit. And no time to go to scotus. In fact the 5th circuit may not even decide in time.
It seems that elpadre was referring to the presidential election genius(not)
"Mississippi Election Case Ruling Could Have 'National Impact': Attorney"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following.
Democratic and Republican Trump supporters, please brace yourselves for MAJOR anti-Trump media propaganda on Election Day evening, complete with misleading, predominantly blue electoral vote maps on your screens, the media falsely claiming that OHarris won the election.
In fact, it took Bush a month of court proceedings before he became official winner of 2000 election.
"A month-long series of legal battles [emphasis added] led to the highly controversial 5–4 Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, which ended the recount. Bush won Florida by 537 votes, a margin of 0.009%."2000 United States presidential election (non-FR)
Next, there is no way to reverse-engineer corrupt Democratic scam mail-in ballots to constitutional procedures for electoral votes, not that RINOs are complaining.
"Article II, Section 1, Clause 2: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress [emphasis added]: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."
Excerpted from 12th Amendment (12A):
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate [emphasis added];--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; ..."
Noting that ordinary citizen voters don't have the constitutionally express power to vote for POTUS like we have for lawmakers, the very small number of official constitutional presidential electors for each state are required to meet in one place to vote, impossible to do with millions of voters, and seal and deliver their write-in ballots to office of VP in an unbroken chain of custody.
In fact, taking California's 64 electoral votes for example, more than any other state, in stark contrast to the electoral vote counting delays that we are now used to seeing, I could probably make 12A lists of presidential and vice-presidential candidate vote totals from California's constitutionally compliant presidential electors, including double-checking my work, probably in under an hour.
In other words, the media electoral vote propaganda that we've all grown up with and consequently don't question is pure political party smoke and mirrors deception imo, undoubtedly intended to deceive the people to think that they are in control of the "all powerful" Oval Office.
The constitutional reality of the Oval Office is that its drafters established the Electoral College to make sure that the right person is in the wartime Oval Office.
At the other extreme, the Electoral College is MAJOR overkill for giving ordinary, constitutionally unauthorized presidential voters a voice to complain about high cost of stamps and slow mail delivery, the US Mail Service being one of the very few powers that the feds actually have to dictate peacetime domestic policy.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Since Congress and renegade states have repeatedly proven that they are enemies of the people imo, it is now up to Democratic and Republican Trump supporters to effectively "impeach and remove" ALL (exceptions?) state and federal lawmakers and executives in November.
In fact, it's up to us Trump supporters to take the first MAJOR step in draining the swamp by supporting hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, new state lawmakers too, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.
Finally, let's not allow the anti-Trump media try to fade our memories of what we witnessed on July 13.
Down the Memory Hole: Google Hides Autocomplete Suggestions Related to Trump Assassination Attempt (7.28.24)
Well that’s even worse because other than the meeting of electors, there’s no presidential election mentioned in the constitution at all. Genius.
The electors are the 538 people chosen by the states, which assemble on December 17 to elect the president. THAT is the only provision which requires that they assemble on one specific day simultaneously around the country.
Pro tip. Have a clue what you’re talking about before you start name calling.
Which has absolutely ZERO to do with ElPadre’s complaint about election day becoming election season. Do we hold election day on December 17?
A second protip. Don’t hop in for other people when you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Try to keep up.
So your continued idiocy is to try to claim contra elpadre that the Constitution says nothing about the ONE day vote selection to determine the President? !!
Please quit while you are mired behind.
A single day to vote for electors,
who determine the Presidency.
I can see that reality has severely over taxed your cognition such as it is.
Do we still have sanitoriums ?
What are you, five years old? Actually, it would explain the childish behavior, your complete ignorance on the topic, and your ignorance of your own ignorance.
Third and final protein: If you’re going to double down, make sure you have a good hand.
“So your continued idiocy is to try to claim contra elpadre that the Constitution says nothing about the ONE day vote selection to determine the President? !!”
I’m going to go further than that. I’m going to claim the constitution makes no reference to a presidential election at all. (Because it doesn’t).
In case you are actually five years old, I will educate you on the topic, then I will discuss it with you no more (as then you would be unwilling to play in reality, just like most leftists).
This is ALL the constitution has to say about the choosing of electors:
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.” (Article 2, Section 1)
A state legislature can use ANY method it wants to appoint its state’s electors. Vote of the people, vote of the legislature, choice of the governor, the first X number of names in the phone book, whatever it wants. Heck the constitution even uses the word “appoint,” not elect or even choose. Assuming the legislature chooses to appoint based on vote of the people (as all have - 48 winner take all and 2 by congressional district), there is accordingly no rule on when that election must take place. A state could constitutionally hold it any time it wants. For as long as it wants. In whatever method it wants.
The only limit is that congress may provide a a time - a deadline - by which the state must make its decision: “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.” (Article 2, Section 1)
Note the difference in the wording - the “time” the by which the state must “choose” its electors, and then the “day” which “shall be the same throughout the United States” by which the electors must “vote.” Had the founders wanted to force there to be an election for the electors, and that it must occur on a specific day, they obviously could have. They did so in the very same sentence regarding the electors. They also did so regarding the election of representatives for the House (”The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”) For president, they did not.
Then, on the specific day appointed by congress, the electors, regardless of how they are chosen, vote for president.
Really btchy post tonight which conveniently scrubs de jure v de facto,
Of course that is what to be expected from snide snob elitist esq. commentariat.
Shakespeare solution best
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.