The Supreme Court rejects the Democratic attempt to extend the mail-in voting period for Wisconsin

Democrats in the state had asked the court to allow the counting of ballot papers that arrive up to six days after election day if postmarked by November 3rd.

The verdict was 5-3 just before the Senate decided to add Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

Judge Elena Kagan, along with her liberal colleagues Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer, objected to the court’s order.

Last week, the court upheld a Pennsylvania state court ruling extending the postal voting deadline.

The early voting started in Wisconsin last week, and the court’s decision could affect the bottom line on a major battlefield. Wisconsin was one of three Rust Belt states to award the White House to President Donald Trump in 2016, and he and Democratic candidate Joe Biden have made the state a frequent campaign stop.
As in other states, Wisconsin has seen a huge influx of postal ballot papers: By October 19, Wisconsin voters reportedly had returned more than 863,000 postal ballots Data by the state election commission.

Difference Between Pennsylvania and Wisconsin Cases

Monday’s order is the final sign that the judges I don’t want federal courts to change the voting rules too close to the choice.

Unlike last week’s Pennsylvania Order, the Wisconsin Order on Monday concerned a decision by a lower federal court, not a state court, and Chief Justice John Roberts said it made a difference.

A Wisconsin federal district court sided with the Democrats to allow postal ballot papers to be received up to six days after polling day, but an appeals court blocked the order and the Supreme Court upheld the lockdown.

The federal district court, Roberts wrote in a unanimous statement, “intervened in the middle of the election season” to block a state law. He said the case was “federal interference with the state’s legislative processes”.

READ  Town Hall Ratings: More people watched Biden on ABC than Trump on NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC

The Pennsylvania case, on the other hand, was a decision of the state’s highest court. Roberts said the decision “implied the authority of the state courts to apply their own constitutions to electoral law.”

“Different laws and precedents govern these two situations and, in those particular circumstances, require that we allow electoral rules to be changed in Pennsylvania but not in Wisconsin,” wrote Roberts.

It is unclear how long the court will make that distinction after Barrett joins as the ninth member, said Steve Vladeck, CNN legal analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

The legal doctrine that might influence the choice

“The only judiciary that looked at these cases differently from Pennsylvania’s was the Chief Justice, for whom there appears to be a categorical distinction between a Supreme Court extending election deadlines that it refused to change and a federal district court doing the same . ” “Said Vladeck.” But the chief judge’s central role may be short-lived as Judge Barrett is likely to be able to vote on the next election. “

Ballots on time during a pandemic

In their disagreement, Kagan, along with Breyer and Sotomayor, beat the majority as a waiver of voting rights during the pandemic.

“As the COVID pandemic rages,” Kagan wrote, “the court has not adequately protected the nation’s voters.”

“Tens of thousands of Wisconsinites through no fault of their own may receive their ballots too late to return them by election day,” she said. Quote a Dissent written by the late judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg Earlier this year, Kagan said voters must now choose “to defy the polls and the risk involved and lose their voting rights”.

Wisconsin constituencies emphasized the importance of voters getting their ballots in well in advance of the decision.

The Supreme Court decision to let Wisconsin vote during a pandemic boggles the mind. Ginsburg says
Ben Wikler, chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, urged voters to hand in their postal ballot papers. saying that the party is “voting for a huge voter education campaign”.

Wisconsin’s electoral commission said in a statement Monday that it “has consistently advised voters to request and return their postal votes as soon as possible to ensure they are received within the legal deadline of 8 p.m. on election day. Today’s decision changes nothing about that. “

READ  Armenia faces a military debacle and accepts a deal in the Nagorno-Karabakh war

This story has been updated with additional information from the judgment and the commentary.

CNN’s Caroline Kelly, Jeremy Herb, Casey Tolan, Caroline Kenny and Ellie Kaufman contributed to this report.

Written By
More from Arzu Moss

What the Scuttled Ant Group’s IPO means for other Chinese stocks

Text size The mascot of the group of ants. Qilai Shen /...
Read More

Leave a Reply

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