Pennsylvania was amongst the group of states in which former President Donald Trump and supporters attempted to challenge the events surrounding the 2020 presidential election, but the United States Supreme Court declined to hear the Pennsylvania appeal this week.
Back in September of 2020, the PA Supreme Court issued a ruling requiring election officials to receive and count mailed-in ballots that arrived up to three days after the election. The court reasoned that the extension was appropriate because of the likelihood of postal delays as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. In similar cases in other states, Republicans asked the U.S. Supreme Court to put this extension on hold ahead of the election, but the Supreme Court refused to expedite these cases before Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46th President of the United States.
Only about 10,000 ballots arrived within this three-day extension period, which was well below the votes exceeding 80,0000 that President Biden beat Trump by in Pennsylvania. For this reason, many justices considered the cases moot.
The Republicans behind the challenge acknowledged that they were not challenging the overall election results, but rather were challenging the state Supreme Court’s power to usurp the authority of the state legislature.
The majority justices offered no public explanation for their rejection of the case, but three justices—Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch—dissented. Justice Thomas called the decision to extend the ballot deadline a decision to “rewrite the rules.” He criticized the court for failing to consider the issue of state authority in regard to elections stating, “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”
Justice Alito further criticized the court’s decision stating, “A decision in these cases would not have any implications regarding the 2020 election…But a decision would provide invaluable guidance for future elections.”
Although the justices’ decision not to hear the case ends months of legal speculation and election controversy, many still contend that deciding the role of the courts in federal elections is a question that the court will inevitably have to confront in the future
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf tweeted:
“Pennsylvania had a free and fair election — that’s a fact. Thank you to the millions of voters who turned out to make their voices heard and to the election workers and volunteers who served admirably. It’s time to move on.”
Leave a Reply