What do you think of the merits of Trump’s case in PA?

[LuFins Dad]

As far as I understand it, the basic gist is that the Constitution requires the state legislature to proscribe the rules and requirements by which the electors are chosen. Since the extension was made by the Executive Branch and not the Legislature, then the rule was invalid and they are required to adhere to the original rules for the mail in ballots, which would eliminate many of those received.

1. Do I have the basic gist correct?

2. what do you think of the general merits?

[jon-nyc]

It’s really hard to tell without reading the briefs.

The wording in the constitution is probably pretty general. Surely the board of elections makes all kinds of decisions big and small. So you’d have to see how it was worded in the constitution and what the precedent is.

The PA state Supreme Court already ruled on this. And Scotus is usually quite deferential to state supreme courts about interpreting state constitutions. In fact I think that was part of the reasoning in Bush v Gore.

[jon-nyc]

Oh, and this is a really blatant attempt at voter suppression. Hard to make a case why there’s some especial risk of fraud for ballots put in the mail on the 31st of October vs the 30th.

[jon-nyc]

Anyone more curious than me can read the PA Scotus ruling here:

https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/1589ec07-66e0-485c-b9be-9f7a03e99643-1.pdf

[Jolly]

I think that Pennsylvania blew it.

[Mik]

He doesn’t drink. Why would he have a case of IPA?

[Copper]

@jon-nyc said in What do you think of the merits of Trump’s case in PA?:

Oh, and this is a really blatant attempt at voter suppression.

You might as well say it is good for the environment.

That's not the point.