SCOTUS Punts Pennsylvania Election Case

SCOTUS Punts Pennsylvania Election Case

SCOTUS Punts Pennsylvania Election Case

SCOTUS punted the Pennsylvania election case today. They effectively kicked the election can down the road by determining the case was MOOT.

“The Supreme Court on Monday turned away Republican challenges to the presidential elections results in Pennsylvania, refusing to take up a months-long dispute over extending the deadline in that state for receiving mail-in ballots.

It was part of a purge of sorts. The high court formally dismissed a range of suits filed by Donald Trump and his allies in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia and Arizona — all states won by Democrat Joe Biden. The court’s intent in most of those had been signaled when it refused to expedite consideration of them before Biden was inaugurated as president.”

Here’s the thing about this particular case in Pennsylvania. The legislature had voted and passed legislation that mandated ALL ballots, including absentee ballots, be received by 8pm on election night. Any ballots received after that deadline wouldn’t be counted. This was a well-known rule throughout Pennsylvania. 

But then, the State Supreme Court got involved after Democrats sued. Suddenly, in the midst of the election, after ballots had already been sent out, the court moved the deadline to three days AFTER the election. Their reasons? Covid and the U.S. mail. Stupid reasons if you ask me. But that is what Pennsylvania’s court did. They arbitrarily overruled the legislation because reasons. What’s even worse about their ruling is it also opened the door to allowing ballots to be counted, even if no signature nor a valid postmark. But nothing to see here, no potential of election fraud whatsoever. None. 

So, the case was brought before the United States Supreme Court. Did all the justices look at the merits and background of the case and decide to hear it? No. Instead SCOTUS punts once again. 

As Congressman Steve Scalise points out, the cases before SCOTUS are about states that didn’t follow the laws and made arbitrary changes that went counter to current election laws.

Three justices wanted the case to be heard. Justices Alito and Gorsuch:

“I agree with JUSTICE THOMAS that we should grant review in these cases. They present an important and recurring constitutional question: whether the Elections or Electors Clauses of the United States Constitution, Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl. 2, are violated when a state court holds that a state constitutional provision overrides a state statute governing the manner in which a federal election is to be conducted. That question has divided the lower courts,* and our review at this time would be greatly beneficial.”

Justice Clarence Thomas argued that last minute changes left people distrustful of the process even if the outcome wouldn’t have changed:

“That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future. These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set elec- tion rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

“One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us,” he continued.”

Indeed. Rules were made and changed willy nilly. That SHOULD be addressed by SCOTUS. But instead SCOTUS punts once again. 

Quite honestly, this case needed to be heard and the merits argued. The 2016 and 2020 elections are prime examples as to why this should’ve happened. I’m quite frankly disappointed in Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett for their inaction on this. Our vote is our VOICE. It is one of the most precious items of freedom and liberty that we enjoy in this Republic. However, when there are state governments or courts making changes that seemingly benefit only one side, even the perception of bias has an effect of muting those voices who deserve to be heard. Which is antithetical to our Constitution and to our freedom. 

SCOTUS punts on a very important election case, which sets a bad precedent for our future elections, legislation, and court rulings. 

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Feature Photo Credit: election ballot box by Conolan via Pixabay, cropped and modified

Written by

  • Paladin says:

    Official SCOTUS Fraud Certification

  • John Wilson says:

    Yes, what did happen to Kavanaugh and Barrett? She sure looked like a straight shooter but now? Kavanaugh was so traumatized by his hearings, he’s been neutered bit Barrett seemed to be a strong person.

  • jim murray says:

    The supremes are supposed to judge according to the constitution not ‘moot-ness.’. I think that in the light of the failure of all branches of government it is time to re-write the constitution via a convention.

  • mac says:

    President Trump exercises his superpower once again: that of getting his enemies to expose themselves as to who they really are. There isn’t ONE of our governmental institutions that isn’t rotten to the core, and they’ve proven it themselves. The DOJ, FBI, CIA, SCOTUS, Congress…there isn’t one of them worthy of trust. They have all betrayed the American people in broad daylight. Anyone still having the slightest bit of faith in the American Federal Government is a damned fool.

  • buddhaha says:


    SCOTUS has accepted the hecklers’ veto as legitimate.

    Congress has surrounded the Capitol with the all the accoutrements of a banana republic (fences, barbed wire and armed military) showing that a late night 7-11clerk has bigger balls.

    The Executive? I really can’t tell if President Asterisk is scared of the left wing of the party, or his behavior is a functiin of non compos mentis.

  • WWT says:

    I find it interesting that you find yourself disappointed with Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett. What about Roberts? We all know the answer there, he’s worthless, we all know that now, and we’ll waste no more time on him. Clearly, the Supreme Court can no longer be expected to protect the rights of Americans. Where does that leave us? Without recourse in law. Not a good place to be, particularly considering the oncoming assaults on the First and Second Amendments (just to name 2).

  • Rick Caird says:

    This is another case of :John Robert’s cowardice. It is absolutely clear that in the Texas case and this one, there is only one course of action. Roberts is still unwilling to do the right thing and uphold the Constitution.

  • 0317 says:

    “I think that in the light of the failure of all branches of government it is time to re-write the constitution via a convention.”
    Too late.
    The rules will be rewritten by half the country eliminating the other half.
    Which half wins is unknown.

  • Cleetus says:

    Should anyone really be surprised at the SCOTUS punting on this?

    Let’s look at the possibilities.

    If SCOTUS takes the case and declares the states did not violate the Constitution when they unilaterally changed the voting laws, then this sets the country up for disaster. For the foreseeable future any governor, Sec State, etc., could claim they had the right to change any law on their say so. The SCOTUS said it was OK. Think of the turmoil.

    If SCOTUS took the case and determined the changes in the law were unconstitutional, then this would result in everyone now asking about the similar behavior in every other state where the governor, Sec. State, etc., changed the voting laws by dictate. So now the public is left asking how many votes were cast and counted in violation of the Constitution and of those how many went to Biden thus indicating Biden had been elected illegally. Now what happens? Is Biden removed from office and Trump installed? OMG, that would be a nightmare. If Biden were to remain in office, many would claim he is not the legitimate President and that would be a nightmare. No matter how it could be resolved, the country would suffer a catastrophic result.

    The bottom line is the SCOTUS had to punt on this. If Democrats try this again then the SCOTUS could take the case and, if they declared the practice performed this year as unconstitutional, then there would be a backlash, but considerably smaller. Even then it would be disastrous.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner