Pennsylvania High Court Rules On Mail In Ballots With Date Discrepancies

The latest and trending news from around the world.

Pennsylvania’s top court reaffirms mail ballots with missing, improper dates can’t be counted
Pennsylvania’s top court reaffirms mail ballots with missing, improper dates can’t be counted from

Pennsylvania High Court Rules on Mail-In Ballots with Date Discrepancies

Court Rejects Republican Challenge

On January 19, 2023, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing mail-in ballots with missing or incorrect dates to be counted in the May 16, 2022, primary election.

The decision was a blow to Republicans, who had argued that such ballots should be disqualified. The court, however, ruled that the state’s election code does not require voters to include a date on their mail-in ballots and that the lack of a date does not render a ballot invalid.

Background of the Case

The case stemmed from a lawsuit filed by a group of Republican voters who alleged that thousands of mail-in ballots in the May 2022 primary election were cast without a date or with an incorrect date. They argued that these ballots should not be counted, as they violated the state’s election code.

A lower court agreed with the Republicans and ruled that the ballots in question should not be counted. However, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned that decision, ruling that the ballots are valid and can be counted.

Implications of the Ruling

The court’s ruling is a significant victory for Democrats, who have argued that the state’s election code does not require voters to include a date on their mail-in ballots.

The ruling also means that thousands of previously uncounted ballots will now be counted, which could potentially affect the outcome of several close races in the May 2022 primary election.

Dissenting Opinions

Two of the seven justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dissented from the majority ruling. They argued that the state’s election code requires voters to include a date on their mail-in ballots and that the lack of a date renders a ballot invalid.

The dissenting justices also argued that the majority’s ruling could lead to voter fraud, as it makes it easier for people to cast ballots multiple times.