General Discussion

Roland99

(53,342 posts) Fri Oct 23, 2020, 01:30 PM Oct 2020

154

BREAKING: PA Supreme Court rules election officials are PROHIBITED from rejecting mail-in ballots... [View all]

BREAKING: Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules that election officials are PROHIBITED from rejecting mail-in ballots based on signature comparison.

Link to tweet

BREAKING: Pennsylvania Supreme Court rules that election officials are PROHIBITED from rejecting mail-in ballots based on signature comparison. Nor may a party "challenge based on signature analysis and comparisons."

https://www.democracydocket.com/cases/pennsylvania-kings-bench-petition/

Read the brief joining the Secretary’s petition here.
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/10/Application-for-Intervention-1.pdf

Read the order granting application for extraordinary relief here.
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/10/Order-Limited-Granting-Application-for-Extraordinary-Relief1.pdf

Read the opinion here.
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/10/Petition-for-Declarative-Relief-Granted.pdf

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

BREAKING: PA Supreme Court rules election officials are PROHIBITED from rejecting mail-in ballots... [View all] Roland99 Oct 2020 OP

Good. This rejection solely based on unprofessional comparisons of signatures is ridiculous. SWBTATTReg Oct 2020 #1

Yep! MyOwnPeace Oct 2020 #5

In 2012, I voted in person and the poll worker questioned my signature... Kahuna Oct 2020 #20

Texas lost that same case.. ananda Oct 2020 #22

Most handwriting analysis is junk science anyway obamanut2012 Oct 2020 #2

I once read a supposed analysis of Trump's signature that pointed out Hortensis Oct 2020 #48

Comparison is not "analysis" Grins Oct 2020 #53

Excellent news - Ms. Toad Oct 2020 #3

This should be a national finding exboyfil Oct 2020 #4

This! Should indeed be a national finding! n/t MFGsunny Oct 2020 #7

Yep.... and I bet someone with an afro-centric name gets more scrutiny than John Smith groundloop Oct 2020 #11

This is Yuge. Not only a great decision but one is a critical state like PA. Statistical Oct 2020 #6

Is this really a good thing? getagrip_already Oct 2020 #8

The same thing that stops people from doing a lot of illegal things. Mr.Bill Oct 2020 #10

unless they are promised a pardon... getagrip_already Oct 2020 #14

kinda with you here. stopdiggin Oct 2020 #25

They would be taking the risk that the REAL voters would realize they hadn't received a ballot pnwmom Oct 2020 #33

Voter envelopes are uniquely tracked. Voters are notified when mailed, when returned. bucolic_frolic Oct 2020 #41

Oh please, who has that kind of time. Rice4VP Oct 2020 #42

Yes. It's a very good thing. kcr Oct 2020 #51

Could Trump's lawyers use that to take to the SCOTUS after he loses Pennsylvania? LiberalLovinLug Oct 2020 #9

not likely, esp since elections are up to each state on how to conduct them Roland99 Oct 2020 #12

That did not hold true in Florida in 2000 csziggy Oct 2020 #17

true Roland99 Oct 2020 #18

and in the latest scotus ruling getagrip_already Oct 2020 #30

Yes, I worry about the future of our country csziggy Oct 2020 #35

Great! BBG Oct 2020 #13

i doubt we've heard the last of it. barbtries Oct 2020 #15

Doubtful, it was a unanimous decision included all Republican Justices grantcart Oct 2020 #54

that's great, barbtries Oct 2020 #55

There is so much back story surrounding the PA Republicans efforts to disenfranchise PA voters.. asiliveandbreathe Oct 2020 #16

But military ballots are ok to be counted after election day DeminPennswoods Oct 2020 #40

What do you mean...military ballots are ok to be counted after election day.. asiliveandbreathe Oct 2020 #47

Sorry, I don't agree with y'all on this one. moreland01 Oct 2020 #19

The process you describe sounds reasonable. I tried to read the legal stuff in the OP's... LAS14 Oct 2020 #26

thanks. and thanks for your bit of expertise stopdiggin Oct 2020 #27

There IS a verification process. The order says that the signature cannot be the reason for a reject Roland99 Oct 2020 #32

Ruling says officials aren't REQUIRED to reject a ballot SOLELY on the basis of signature mismatch. klook Oct 2020 #43

If you registered to vote 10 years ago, are you really Rice4VP Oct 2020 #44

Sorry, but signatures do change kcr Oct 2020 #52

This message was self-deleted by its author standingtall Oct 2020 #21

yay. id love to file up with a lawsuit on denying people their basic right to vote . AllaN01Bear Oct 2020 #23

Wow. MissB Oct 2020 #24

Arizona too madeup64 Oct 2020 #28

I would guess DENVERPOPS Oct 2020 #29

Just as they call even the most moderate Democrat "A SOCIALIST!!1!!11!" klook Oct 2020 #45

Excellent! Sherman A1 Oct 2020 #31

This court can smell the ratfuckery in the GOP actions RainCaster Oct 2020 #34

SCOTUS denied rethugs - asiliveandbreathe Oct 2020 #49

Supplemental BumRushDaShow Oct 2020 #36

HUGE news!! Marc Elias is one of our most important champions. klook Oct 2020 #37

Signatures change over time, fingers get wobbly as ligaments thicken bucolic_frolic Oct 2020 #38

The fact is, signatures change over time DeminPennswoods Oct 2020 #39

I voted this morning. cab67 Oct 2020 #46

Rt.. TY! Cha Oct 2020 #50

Court rulings are SOOO last century. They are like subpeonas, mere suggestions. not_the_one Oct 2020 #56

SC rules only white, male landowners can vote. Is this far off really? BlueNProud Oct 2020 #57