PA Supreme Court Against Undated Mail-In Ballots in Senate Race

2 hours ago

839 posts

PA Supreme Court Against Undated Mail-In Ballots in Senate Race \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that mail-in ballots lacking correct handwritten dates on return envelopes cannot be counted in the U.S. Senate race between Democratic incumbent Bob Casey and Republican David McCormick. The decision strengthens McCormick’s position as he leads Casey by about 17,000 votes, within the margin for a statewide recount. The ruling aligns with previous court decisions requiring strict adherence to ballot dating rules, a measure contested by Democrats as unnecessary.

Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballot Ruling: Quick Looks

Supreme Court Decision: Counties barred from counting undated mail-in ballots.
Impact on Race: McCormick holds a 17,000-vote lead ahead of a likely recount.
Key Issue: Court upheld requirement for handwritten dates on return envelopes.
Democratic Pushback: Some Democratic counties defied the ruling, counting undated ballots.
Ballot Security Debate: Republicans see dates as critical; Democrats call them clerical.
Recount Threshold: McCormick’s lead is within Pennsylvania’s 0.5% margin for recount.
Historical Context: Similar rulings have reinstated the dating requirement in past elections.
Broader Legal Question: Pending case questions if the law violates voting rights protections.

Deep Look

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court issued a decisive ruling on Monday, mandating that counties exclude mail-in ballots without proper handwritten dates on their return envelopes from the ongoing vote count in the hotly contested U.S. Senate election. The ruling, a key win for Republican candidate David McCormick, may significantly impact the race’s outcome as Pennsylvania prepares for a likely statewide recount.

The Ruling and Its Immediate Impact

The court’s decision reinforces its previous position that undated mail-in ballots violate state election law and cannot be included in the count. This stance directly opposes actions by Democratic-majority election boards in Montgomery, Philadelphia, and Bucks counties, which had chosen to count ballots missing or with incorrect dates.

As of Monday, McCormick leads Democratic incumbent Bob Casey by approximately 17,000 votes out of nearly 7 million cast, within the 0.5% margin required for an automatic recount under Pennsylvania law. The Associated Press had already called the race for McCormick last week, projecting that Casey had no path to close the gap with the remaining ballots.

Republican Arguments and the Legal Battle

Republicans sought the court’s intervention last week, arguing that counting undated mail-in ballots contravenes established precedent and the court’s own previous orders. The GOP maintains that the date requirement is a critical safeguard for ballot security, ensuring that votes meet all legal criteria before being counted.

Initially, Republicans also targeted Centre County for allegedly counting undated ballots, but later withdrew their objections after determining only three such ballots were included, which they deemed reasonable. Statewide, thousands of mail-in ballots are estimated to lack proper dates, though most counties—especially larger, Democrat-led ones—have already excluded them.

Democrats’ Position on Undated Ballots

Democrats argue that the handwritten date on return envelopes is a procedural formality with no bearing on a voter’s eligibility or the legitimacy of their ballot. Citing past judicial rulings against the requirement, Democratic leaders have pushed to count such ballots, emphasizing voter intent over minor technical errors.

Election officials in the contested counties echoed this sentiment, stating that rejecting ballots over missing or incorrect dates disenfranchises voters. However, Republicans counter that adherence to the letter of the law is necessary to maintain election integrity.

Legal Precedent and Ongoing Challenges

This is not the first time Pennsylvania’s dating requirement for mail-in ballots has faced judicial scrutiny. Courts at various levels, including the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, have previously ruled against the requirement, only to have higher courts reinstate it.

A pending case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could bring broader implications, as it challenges whether the dating requirement infringes on the constitutional right to vote. The court has yet to rule on this issue, leaving the law in its current form for now.

McCormick’s Strategic Shift

Interestingly, McCormick previously aligned with Democrats on this issue during his narrow primary loss to Dr. Mehmet Oz in the 2022 Republican U.S. Senate primary. At the time, McCormick’s legal team argued that Pennsylvania’s election laws prioritize enabling voter participation over penalizing minor errors.

Despite his prior stance, McCormick now benefits from the court’s reinforcement of the dating requirement. His campaign has leaned on Republican arguments to secure favorable rulings and maintain his lead over Casey.

Broader Implications and Next Steps

As the recount process looms, the debate over undated mail-in ballots highlights the ongoing tension between voter access and election security in Pennsylvania and beyond. The state Supreme Court’s ruling serves as a reminder of the complexities surrounding mail-in voting, particularly in high-stakes races.

For McCormick, the decision solidifies his lead, though challenges remain as the recount approaches. For Casey and Democrats, the ruling underscores a persistent struggle to mitigate what they view as unnecessary technical barriers to counting legitimate votes.

Meanwhile, the broader question of whether Pennsylvania’s dating requirement violates constitutional voting rights remains unresolved. As the case moves forward, it could set a significant precedent for future elections, particularly in battleground states where mail-in voting continues to play a pivotal role.