WASHINGTON — Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling allowed election officials in Pennsylvania to begin counting mail-in ballots of voters who did not fill out the date on the ballot envelopes.
This issue was of particular interest to Pennsylvania’s Senate GOP primary. The question will likely be raised in future disputed elections.
Pennsylvania’s vote totals for Mehmet Oz, the celebrity surgeon, were separated by less than 1,000 ballots. This was despite being endorsed in part by former President Donald Trump and David McCormick, who worked as a hedge fund executive. Because they did not have a date, at least 860 postal ballots were not counted.
McCormick admitted the race to Oz was over last week, before a recount was completed. However, the mail ballots were unlikely to be decisive considering the difficulty of exceeding a deficit of almost 900 votes.
However, the Supreme Court order was issued in a Pennsylvania election for a state judgeship in 2021. Democrat Zac Cohen was ahead by 71 votes in that contest. The total does not include mail-in votes that were submitted without the required date as required by state law.
Pennsylvania law requires that all ballots by mail be placed in pre-printed envelopes. A state court had ruled that undated ballots shouldn’t be counted in the judicial elections. However, a group voters appealed to the federal court.
The U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, based out of Philadelphia, ruled that a provision of federal Civil Rights Act requires that ballots be counted, even if they contain minor errors not relevant to determining if the voter is legally eligible to vote.
Pennsylvania’s attorney general ruled that mail ballots must be counted, even if the date on the envelope is incorrect. According to the appeals court, “If the content of the string numbers doesn’t matter, it is difficult to see how one could claim this requirement has any value in determining a voter’s qualifications.”
On Thursday, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito argued that the court was wrong in allowing the undated ballots to be counted. Alito wrote for Thomas and Gorsuch and said that the appeals court’s decision was new and very likely incorrect.
Alito wrote that if left unattended, it could have an impact on the outcome of the fall election. He also suggested that the Supreme Court should have heard the appeal.
Alito stated that anyone can vote if they abide by the requirements of the Legislature. Because the rules were not followed, the ballot isn’t counted. “Even the most permissive rules for voting must have some requirements. Failure to comply with those requirements constitutes the forfeiture and not denial of the right to vote.”
