On May 20, the Third Circuit issued a three-page order in Migliari v Lehigh County Board of Elections, 22-1499, that 257 disputed mail-in ballots case in a Pennsylvania election last year should count. The judges relied on the “materiality” language in the federal Voting Rights Act, which says that states many not “deny the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote in such election.”
This is a powerful law, which was originally known as 42 U.S.C. 1971, and has since been re-codified as 52 U.S.C. 10101(c)(2)(B). In the past it has sometimes been used to prevent states from disqualifying petitions for trivial errors.
In this case, the Third Circuit ruled that the Pennsylvania law requiring mail-in ballots to contain the signing date, next to the voter’s signature, on the outer envelope of a postal ballot is not “material”. Because it is obvious that the voter cast the ballot in time (because the elections office received it in time), the judgment is that the date is not important enough to invalidate the ballot.
The judges have not yet written an opinion explaining their reasoning, but will do so soon. The judges are Theodore McKee and Joseph Greenaway (Clinton appointees), and Paul Matey (a Trump appointee). The lower court had ducked the issue on procedural grounds.
The Pennsylvania state courts have not been clear about their attitude toward the date requirement.
one more vague for vagueness adjective [word] in a mere law.
Now, if we could just get something similar out of the Fifth Circuit on the craphouse of Texas’ mail-in ballot law changes and humongous rejection rate.
Shut up Stock. Leave Texas alone and focus on your own state. OK. Focus on cleaning the coffee pot, getting rid of the curry smell, and cleaning the vomit out of the elevator at the Motel 6.
The garbage comment on May 21, 2022 at 1:17 pm is indeed from Robert K Stock.
Absolutely disgusting. Why does Robert K Stock keep leaving garbage comments here?
I remember in my younger day there wasn’t any voting counting problems with the lever machines. All the votes were counted and called out at the polls by 11PM, any citizen could witness the counting, a paper trial was kept to backup the actual voting machine results. Why did we get off something that works?
Lever machines did not allow for a recount; there was no paper trail. People could re-check the back of the machine again and again, but that’s not the same as a real recount.
Thanks Richard. Been a long time=brain fog. I can now see why they got rid of lever machines if no paper backup to recount. I remember one time in Caroline County, MD they had cardboard ballots they gave to voters and the voter tossed it on the table when completed in a pile on the way out the door.
Local regime had a few rigged elections using olde iron clunker voting machines.
Pull level for A — vote counted for Z.
The decision is illegitimate and judge made law. The federal courts, in an illegitimate power grab, have suddenly decided they can rule on state issues. THEY CANNOT!
Tom Wolf needs to declare this third circuit “ruling” in violation of the Pennsylvania constitution and that is null and void. We will stop this judicial tyranny once and for all. This is a great place to start.
In this case, the 3rd circuit was interpreting the federal Voting Rights Act.