Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Every voter in TX and many other states were disenfranchised by the states (including Pennsylvania) that held unconstitutional federal elections. If a state wants to change their federal election law, they may only do so via the State Legislature, as required by the US Constitution. Random members of the state's executive and/or judicial branch cannot unilaterally do so.
Every voter in TX and many other states were disenfranchised by the states (including Pennsylvania) that held unconstitutional federal elections. If a state wants to change their federal election law, they may only do so via the State Legislature, as required by the US Constitution. Random members of the state's executive and/or judicial branch cannot unilaterally do so.
No one in Texas was disenfranchised. Their votes were counted. Their states' electors reflected the votes in the state. States did modify their election laws via the state legislatures, and as is common. What actions by executive branch officials or the judiciary do you object to, specifically?
Bingo. There are specific US Constitutional requirements for states' federal elections that must be met. Pennsylvania and several other states violated those Constitutional requirements.
In regard to Pennsylvania, there is no question about public officials violating the State's Constitution.
Looking at the written law confirms no-excuse mail in ballots in PA are unconstitutional. Here is why.
Clause 1 of Article VII of PA’s Constitution declares:
“Every citizen 21 years of age, possessing the following qualifications, shall be entitled to vote at all elections subject, however, to such laws requiring and regulating the registration of electors as the General Assembly may enact.”
And, Section 14 of Article VII was enacted which is titled:
§ 14. Absentee voting.
(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the municipality of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.
As you can see, Section 14 provides two, and only two ways by which a qualified elector may cast his or her vote in an election:
(1) by submitting his or her vote in propria persona at the polling place on election day; and
(2) by submitting an absentee ballot, but only if the qualified voter satisfies one of the conditions under which absentee voting is authorized as outlined above in “Absentee voting”.
Act 77 is a Clear Violation of the Constitution and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has Previously Struck Down Similar Laws and Set Aside Illegal Mail-in Ballots
No-excuse absentee ballots are not authorized by § 14. “Absentee voting”. The Act of October 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 is a legislative attempt to fundamentally change Pennsylvania’s voting system, permitting no-excuse mail-in voting, without amending Pennsylvania’s Constitution
To "move on" without our Supreme Court addressing the questions raised, is to invite more corruption into our federal election process, eventually leaving us with the kinds of elections which take place in Venezuela, Cuba, etc.
Does this not disturb you?
JWK
This why we have a Supreme Court. To rule on constitutional issues. Sometimes that means refusing to even hear a case.
No one in Texas was disenfranchised. Their votes were counted. Their states' electors reflected the votes in the state. States did modify their election laws via the state legislatures, and as is common. What actions by executive branch officials or the judiciary do you object to, specifically?
Electors are chosen by a popular vote of the people.
If a state’s employees, e.g., in Pennsylvania, violate the State’s Constitution and corrupt the electoral process by introducing a million illegal ballots in a federal electoral process with the intention of favoring a particular candidate, not only has that State’s voters’ right to vote been abridged, but the illegal activity has corrupted the federal electoral process for voters across the nation who have cast ballots in accordance with the rule of law
Elevating a particular candidate in one state by illegal methods is most certainly an abridgement of the right to vote of people in others states whose legal votes are rendered meaningless, and diminished by the amount of illegal ballots counted in another state. [1]
As succinctly stated by Justice Douglas eighty years ago, when acts of corruption infect a federal electoral process in one state "they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain" ___ Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)".
[1] NOTE: Over 1 million illegal no-excuse mail in ballots were counted in PA’s election results.
Every Texan who voted was disenfranchised. That's what happens when another state holds an unconstitutional federal election.
Quote:
What actions by executive branch officials or the judiciary do you object to, specifically?
All of the unconstitutional ones, which are the election laws that were unconstitutionally changed by random members of the executive and/or judicial branches instead of via the State Legislature, as required by the US Constitution.
As explained by the concurring opinion by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, joined by Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas, in Bush v. Gore in 2000, in which SCOTUS ruled for Bush: "A significant departure from the legislative scheme for appointing Presidential electors presents a federal constitutional question."
Stare decisis indicating that SCOTUS had a duty to hear the TX v. PA, GA, MI, WI case. For whatever reason, one which they will not explain, the Justices abdicated their sworn oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States." I'd like to know why.
Electors are chosen by a popular vote of the people.
If a state’s employees, e.g., in Pennsylvania, violate the State’s Constitution and corrupt the electoral process by introducing a million illegal ballots in a federal electoral process with the intention of favoring a particular candidate, not only has that State’s voters’ right to vote been abridged, but the illegal activity has corrupted the federal electoral process for voters across the nation who have cast ballots in accordance with the rule of law
Elevating a particular candidate in one state by illegal methods is most certainly an abridgement of the right to vote of people in others states whose legal votes are rendered meaningless, and diminished by the amount of illegal ballots counted in another state. [1]
As succinctly stated by Justice Douglas eighty years ago, when acts of corruption infect a federal electoral process in one state "they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain" ___ Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)".
[1] NOTE: Over 1 million illegal no-excuse mail in ballots were counted in PA’s election results.
JWK
NOTE: YOU want to disenfranchise those people who voted in accordance with the law in Pennsylvania, and you want to do that because you don't like who they voted for. Otherwise, you wouldn't be complaining so much.
In regard to Pennsylvania, there is no question about public officials violating the State's Constitution.
Questions regarding violation of the Pennsylvania state constitution should be addressed to the PA state supreme court. SCOTUS has no jurisdiction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
