On Monday, the Supreme Court threw out several of the remaining challenges to the 2020 presidential election as moot, considering that former President Donald Trump conceded to Joe Biden, who has now become president.
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the Supreme Court should have taken the opportunity to clarify election law, especially in the case of Pennsylvania.
Thomas argued that the cases Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Veronica DeGraffenreid and Jake Corman v. Pennsylvania Democratic Party presented "a clear example" of election law issues that the Supreme Court should put to rest.
"The Pennsylvania Legislature established an unambiguous deadline for receiving mail-in ballots: 8 p.m. on election day. Dissatisfied, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended that deadline by three days."
"These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable."
Alito also dismissed as "Highly speculative" the prediction "That the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will not find that conditions at the time of a future federal election are materially similar to those last fall." He also noted that the primary election for Pennsylvania congressional candidates will take place in a mere 15 months.
In addition to these Pennsylvania cases, the Supreme Court also dismissed Donald Trump v. Joe Biden, a case involving the Wisconsin Supreme Court's rulings on absentee ballots.
Monday, February 22, 2021
Supreme Court Strikes Down Pennsylvania Election Lawsuits
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment