The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to stop Pennsylvania from
finalizing President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the state despite
allegations from allies of President Donald Trump that the
expansion of mail-in voting was illegal.
![image](/2020/12/legacy1.jpg")
![image](/2020/10/lawreport.jpg")
The action by the nation’s highest court, which includes three
justices named by Trump, came as states across the country are
locking in the results that will lead to next week’s Electoral
College vote. It represented the latest in a string of stinging
judicial opinions that have left the president defeated both
politically and legally.
![image](/2020/10/NWLRland.jpg")
By their one-sentence denial, the justices left intact a ruling
by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a
state law passed in 2019 came far too late. New Associate Justice
Amy Coney Barrett appeared to have participated in the case; no
dissents or recusals were noted.
Led by conservative Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., the challengers
claimed that the Republican-led state legislature’s expansion of
absentee voting violated the Pennsylvania Constitution. Rather than
going to court after its passage, however, they waited until the
state figured prominently in Trump’s loss to Biden last month.
Trump’s own lawyers have still more lawsuits pending in key
states, including Pennsylvania, where a federal appeals court last
month rejected his unsupported claims that the election was
fraudulent and ballots were processed improperly. To date, however,
judges have rejected nearly all their arguments.
Late Monday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sent a new
long-shot lawsuit to the high court, asking it to block Georgia,
Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin from certifying Biden’s
victory when the Electoral College meets Monday to formally select
the next president. He claimed the four states used the coronavirus
pandemic as a pretext to change voting rules
unconstitutionally.
In the case dismissed Tuesday, challengers contended that state
officials had no right under the Pennsylvania Constitution to
expand mail-in voting in 2019, and the state Supreme Court was
wrong to uphold that statute. The group called it “an
unconstitutional, no-excuse absentee voting scheme.”
“Pennsylvania’s General Assembly exceeded its powers by
unconstitutionally allowing no-excuse absentee voting, including
for federal offices, in the election,” the challengers argued in
court papers. As a result, the election was “conducted
illegally.”
The group sought an emergency injunction from the nation’s
highest court to block the completion of any remaining steps in the
state’s certification of Pennsylvania’s 2020 election results,
which took place two weeks ago.
The effort was a long shot from the start, particularly since it
would have erased the votes of millions of law-abiding citizens
without even claiming that any fraud was committed. What’s more,
the Supreme Court is disinclined to overrule actions taken by state
courts in regard to state issues.
On Monday, the state’s Republican Party, 23 Republicans members
of the U.S. House of Representatives, and 32 Republican state
legislators filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting Kelly and
his fellow challengers. Without high court action, the House
members said they feared “the additional cynicism and rot that
Pennsylvania’s actions will inflict on our national body
politic.”
Attorneys for the state responded Tuesday, accusing challengers
of asking the high court to undertake “one of the most dramatic,
disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the
Republic.”
“After waiting over a year to challenge Act 77, and engaging in
procedural gamesmanship along the way, they come to this court with
unclean hands and ask it to disenfranchise an entire state,” they
argued. “They make that request without any acknowledgment of the
staggering upheaval, turmoil, and acrimony it would unleash…. Their
suit is nothing less than an affront to constitutional
democracy.”
Trump’s campaign has pursued a separate battle in Pennsylvania
federal courts to block or rescind the certification of the state’s
election results. However, two lower federal courts issued scathing
rulings that said the campaign lacked legal standing to pursue the
case, as well as any specific allegations or evidence.
The state court case was filed Nov. 21, more than two weeks
after Election Day and about a year after the Pennsylvania General
Assembly approved what’s known as Act 77, a major overhaul of the
state’s election code.
The change included the first authorization of wide-scale
mail-in voting in the state’s history. This year’s presidential
race marked the first time the changes were in effect for a
Pennsylvania general election.
Gov. Thomas Wolf, a Democrat, certified Pennsylvania’s election
results three days after the petition was filed in state court. The
certification showed that Biden beat Trump in the state by a
80,555-vote margin.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY
The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to stop Pennsylvania from
finalizing President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the state despite
allegations from allies of President Donald Trump that the
expansion of mail-in voting was illegal.
The action by the nation’s highest court, which includes three
justices named by Trump, came as states across the country are
locking in the results that will lead to next week’s Electoral
College vote. It represented the latest in a string of stinging
judicial opinions that have left the president defeated both
politically and legally.
By their one-sentence denial, the justices left intact a ruling
by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a
state law passed in 2019 came far too late. New Associate Justice
Amy Coney Barrett appeared to have participated in the case; no
dissents or recusals were noted.
Led by conservative Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., the challengers
claimed that the Republican-led state legislature’s expansion of
absentee voting violated the Pennsylvania Constitution. Rather than
going to court after its passage, however, they waited until the
state figured prominently in Trump’s loss to Biden last month.
Trump’s own lawyers have still more lawsuits pending in key
states, including Pennsylvania, where a federal appeals court last
month rejected his unsupported claims that the election was
fraudulent and ballots were processed improperly. To date, however,
judges have rejected nearly all their arguments.
Late Monday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sent a new
long-shot lawsuit to the high court, asking it to block Georgia,
Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin from certifying Biden’s
victory when the Electoral College meets Monday to formally select
the next president. He claimed the four states used the coronavirus
pandemic as a pretext to change voting rules
unconstitutionally.
In the case dismissed Tuesday, challengers contended that state
officials had no right under the Pennsylvania Constitution to
expand mail-in voting in 2019, and the state Supreme Court was
wrong to uphold that statute. The group called it “an
unconstitutional, no-excuse absentee voting scheme.”
“Pennsylvania’s General Assembly exceeded its powers by
unconstitutionally allowing no-excuse absentee voting, including
for federal offices, in the election,” the challengers argued in
court papers. As a result, the election was “conducted
illegally.”
The group sought an emergency injunction from the nation’s
highest court to block the completion of any remaining steps in the
state’s certification of Pennsylvania’s 2020 election results,
which took place two weeks ago.
The effort was a long shot from the start, particularly since it
would have erased the votes of millions of law-abiding citizens
without even claiming that any fraud was committed. What’s more,
the Supreme Court is disinclined to overrule actions taken by state
courts in regard to state issues.
On Monday, the state’s Republican Party, 23 Republicans members
of the U.S. House of Representatives, and 32 Republican state
legislators filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting Kelly and
his fellow challengers. Without high court action, the House
members said they feared “the additional cynicism and rot that
Pennsylvania’s actions will inflict on our national body
politic.”
Attorneys for the state responded Tuesday, accusing challengers
of asking the high court to undertake “one of the most dramatic,
disruptive invocations of judicial power in the history of the
Republic.”
“After waiting over a year to challenge Act 77, and engaging in
procedural gamesmanship along the way, they come to this court with
unclean hands and ask it to disenfranchise an entire state,” they
argued. “They make that request without any acknowledgment of the
staggering upheaval, turmoil, and acrimony it would unleash…. Their
suit is nothing less than an affront to constitutional
democracy.”
Trump’s campaign has pursued a separate battle in Pennsylvania
federal courts to block or rescind the certification of the state’s
election results. However, two lower federal courts issued scathing
rulings that said the campaign lacked legal standing to pursue the
case, as well as any specific allegations or evidence.
The state court case was filed Nov. 21, more than two weeks
after Election Day and about a year after the Pennsylvania General
Assembly approved what’s known as Act 77, a major overhaul of the
state’s election code.
The change included the first authorization of wide-scale
mail-in voting in the state’s history. This year’s presidential
race marked the first time the changes were in effect for a
Pennsylvania general election.
Gov. Thomas Wolf, a Democrat, certified Pennsylvania’s election
results three days after the petition was filed in state court. The
certification showed that Biden beat Trump in the state by a
80,555-vote margin.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY