PA state CONSTITUTION bans no-excuse mail-in voting but 35% of 2020 vote was mail-in

Flash said:
HARRISBURG — The state Supreme Court has upheld Pennsylvania’s mail ballot law, preserving for the time being a popular voting method that passed the legislature with bipartisan support but was later challenged by Republican elected officials.
In a 5-2 decision released Tuesday, the justices rejected the GOP argument that the legislature did not have the power under the state constitution to allow Pennsylvanians to vote by mail without an excuse.
The 2019 law, known as Act 77 and employed for the first time during the contentious 2020 presidential election, ushered in the most sweeping expansion of voting access in Pennsylvania in decades.
Click to expand...

How many times must we explain this? Judges are no more allowed to ignore the state constitution than you or i. Judges are not above the law.
 
If state legislators want to change the state constitution, they have to go thru the amending process and they didn't do that. This is absolute proof of massive electoral fraud in PA.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
How many times must we explain this? Judges are no more allowed to ignore the state constitution than you or i. Judges are not above the law.
Click to expand...

Not according to the court decision about the state constitutional provision:

“The amendment did not limit the relevant methods of casting a vote to ballot or voting machine, as were relevant at the time of its passage, but instead provided that the General Assembly could enact laws establishing ‘other methods’ for elections by citizens, subject only to the requirement that the method preserve secrecy in voting,” Donohue said."

https://www.penncapital-star.com/campaigns-elections/pennsylvanias-mail-in-voting-law-survives-constitutional-challenge-by-gop-lawmakers/

Did you agree with the recent Supreme Court decision rejecting the GOP case claiming state legislative supremacy on establishing voting requirements?
 
Flash said:
Not according to the court decision about the state constitutional provision:

“The amendment did not limit the relevant methods of casting a vote to ballot or voting machine, as were relevant at the time of its passage, but instead provided that the General Assembly could enact laws establishing ‘other methods’ for elections by citizens, subject only to the requirement that the method preserve secrecy in voting,” Donohue said."
Click to expand...


That is rewriting the state constitution and courts can't do that. THINK.
 
christiefan915 said:
Give an example of having to "prove" you're in one of the categories, hotshot.


  • Mail-in ballot – Any qualified voter may apply for a mail-in ballot. You may simply request this ballot without a reason.
  • Absentee ballot – If you plan to be out of the municipality on election day or if you have a disability or illness that prevents you from going to your polling place on election day, you can request this ballot type, which still requires you to list a reason for your ballot.

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Voting-in-PA/Pages/Mail-and-Absentee-Ballot.aspx

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Register-to-Vote/Documents/PADOS_mailInapplication.pdf
Click to expand...

He already did. RQAA.
 
Flash said:
HARRISBURG — The state Supreme Court has upheld Pennsylvania’s mail ballot law, preserving for the time being a popular voting method that passed the legislature with bipartisan support but was later challenged by Republican elected officials.
In a 5-2 decision released Tuesday, the justices rejected the GOP argument that the legislature did not have the power under the state constitution to allow Pennsylvanians to vote by mail without an excuse.
The 2019 law, known as Act 77 and employed for the first time during the contentious 2020 presidential election, ushered in the most sweeping expansion of voting access in Pennsylvania in decades.
Click to expand...

No court has authority to change any constitution, Blink.
 
Flash said:
Not according to the court decision about the state constitutional provision:

“The amendment did not limit the relevant methods of casting a vote to ballot or voting machine, as were relevant at the time of its passage, but instead provided that the General Assembly could enact laws establishing ‘other methods’ for elections by citizens, subject only to the requirement that the method preserve secrecy in voting,” Donohue said."

https://www.penncapital-star.com/campaigns-elections/pennsylvanias-mail-in-voting-law-survives-constitutional-challenge-by-gop-lawmakers/

Did you agree with the recent Supreme Court decision rejecting the GOP case claiming state legislative supremacy on establishing voting requirements?
Click to expand...

Misquoting the Constitution isn't going to work, Blink.
 
(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the municipality of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.
Click to expand...

The above is from the PA state constitution...........it provides several exceptions, some very vague, that could easily be expanded by legal definitions written by the legislature, which would then authorize wholesale mail in voting during a pandemic.

the OP is butthurt about the election

the PA court got this one right.
 
Into the Night said:
No court has authority to change any constitution, Blink.
Click to expand...

It is called judicial review. Do some research. Your claim that only the states can change the Constitution is nowhere in that document. You make up your own constitutional law which is always opposite reality. Only your socks agree with you.
 
(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the municipality of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.
Click to expand...

SmarterthanYou said:
The above is from the PA state constitution...........it provides several exceptions, some very vague, that could easily be expanded by legal definitions written by the legislature, which would then authorize wholesale mail in voting during a pandemic.

the OP is butthurt about the election

the PA court got this one right.
Click to expand...

None of it is vague.

Fearmongering of Covid is not an illness nor a physical disability.
It is not a religious holiday. It does not send anyone out of State due to any occupation or business or duty.

The PA court cannot change the constitution of PA nor the Constitution of the United States.
 
Flash said:
It is called judicial review.
Click to expand...
No court has authority to review any constitution.
Flash said:
Do some research.
Click to expand...
Read the Constitution of the United States. That is the ONLY authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.
Flash said:
Your claim that only the states can change the Constitution is nowhere in that document.
Click to expand...
See Article V, Blink.
Flash said:
You make up your own constitutional law which is always opposite reality.
Click to expand...
I am not making up anything. YOU are. Inversion fallacy.
Flash said:
Only your socks agree with you.
Click to expand...
I have no socks, Blink. I don't need them.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
The above is from the PA state constitution...........it provides several exceptions, some very vague, that could easily be expanded by legal definitions written by the legislature, which would then authorize wholesale mail in voting during a pandemic.
Click to expand...


Expanded??? That's called rewriting the constitution and courts can't do that.
 
Flash said:
As envisioned by the framers. It interprets the meaning of the document where there is no clear meaning in modern circumstances.
Click to expand...

the framers did not envision a limited government with the power to define it's own limits. to think that they did is idiocy, at best.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the framers did not envision a limited government with the power to define it's own limits. to think that they did is idiocy, at best.
Click to expand...

They envisioned judicial review. Without it there is no check on the government's power. Congress and the president would have unlimited powers because there is no mechanism to check that power.

The colonial courts used judicial review and Hamilton discussed its necessity in Federalist #78
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top