Loading...

US Supreme Court Moves Up Deadline in Congressman’s Bid to Upend Pa. Election Results

December 7, 2020by Jeremy Roebuck, The Philadelphia Inquirer (TNS)
President Donald Trump, right, greets Rep. Mike Kelly and his wife, Victoria, upon arrival at Erie International Airport in Erie, Pennsylvania, on October 10, 2018. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

PHILADELPHIA — The U.S. Supreme Court moved up a key deadline Sunday for Pennsylvania officials to respond to a last-minute bid by one of Trump’s top boosters in Congress to decertify the state’s elections results.

Previously, Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who oversees emergency matters arising out of Pennsylvania for the court, had given state election administrators until Wednesday to file their response to the appeal from U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly, a Republican who has argued that Pennsylvania’s vote-by-mail law is unconstitutional and that every mail ballot cast in the state should be thrown out.

But on Sunday, Alito moved the schedule in Kelly’s case up by a day, ordering state officials to respond by 9 a.m. Tuesday instead.

The difference of just a day is significant given that the previous deadline of Wednesday fell one day after what is known as the “safe harbor date,” the federal cutoff date for states to resolve any remaining election disputes and lock in their slate of electors for the Dec. 14 Electoral College vote.

Many legal observers read Alito’s initial selection of Dec. 9 as a sign that the court had no intention of acting on the Kelly’s case in a way that would interfere with Pennsylvania awarding its 20 electoral votes to President-elect Joe Biden.

The new deadline falls on the same day as the “safe harbor date” and now would give the court a few hours Tuesday to act on Kelly’s request if it chooses to do so — though Alito did not offer any explanation for the change in schedule Sunday.

Still, experts said it remains unlikely that the wider Supreme Court will be persuaded to take up Kelly’s appeal, given that the remedy it seeks — disenfranchising millions of Pennsylvania voters — is so drastic.

“I would not read too much into this,” said Richard L. Hasen, an election law professor at the University of California-Irvine, in a post on his blog Sunday. “It shows more respect to the petitioners (Kelly), and does not make it look like the court is simply running out the clock on the petition. I still think the chances the court grants any relief on this particular petition are virtually zero.”

Kelly has argued that Pennsylvania lawmakers improperly expanded voting by mail in the state last year with a vote in the state legislature instead of submitting the change through the constitutional amendment process, which would have required a statewide ballot referendum among other procedural steps.

But in throwing out his case Nov. 28, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court said Kelly had waited far too long to file his legal challenge and noted it had only come after his favored candidate, Trump, had lost the election.

The court also balked at his request to disqualify every ballot cast by mail, with one justice calling it “a transparent and untimely effort to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters” in a state Biden won by some 81,000 votes.

___

(c)2020 The Philadelphia Inquirer

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

A+
a-

Supreme Court

Justices' Abortion Remarks: Is it Time to Overturn Roe?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court heard arguments in which it was asked to overturn a nationwide right to abortion that has... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court heard arguments in which it was asked to overturn a nationwide right to abortion that has existed for nearly 50 years. The fate of the court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion throughout the United States and its 1992 ruling in... Read More

December 1, 2021
by Tom Ramstack
Supreme Court Case Hints at Change In Federal Agency Regulation Decisions

WASHINGTON — Conservative judges on the Supreme Court suggested this week during arguments in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit over Medicare drug... Read More

WASHINGTON — Conservative judges on the Supreme Court suggested this week during arguments in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit over Medicare drug reimbursement that now might be the time to overturn a decades-old guiding principle of administrative law. The issue in American Hospital Association v. Becerra is a... Read More

Justices Signal They'll OK New Abortion Limits, May Toss Roe

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday signaled it would uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban on abortion and... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday signaled it would uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban on abortion and may go much further to overturn the nationwide right to abortion that has existed for nearly 50 years. The fate of the court’s historic 1973 Roe... Read More

Abortion Rights at Stake in Historic Supreme Court Arguments

WASHINGTON (AP) — Abortion rights are on the line at the Supreme Court in historic arguments over the landmark ruling nearly 50... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — Abortion rights are on the line at the Supreme Court in historic arguments over the landmark ruling nearly 50 years ago that declared a nationwide right to end a pregnancy. The justices on Wednesday will weigh whether to uphold a Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15... Read More

Supreme Court Set to Take Up All-or-Nothing Abortion Fight

WASHINGTON (AP) — Both sides are telling the Supreme Court there's no middle ground in Wednesday's showdown over abortion. The justices can... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — Both sides are telling the Supreme Court there's no middle ground in Wednesday's showdown over abortion. The justices can either reaffirm the constitutional right to an abortion or wipe it away altogether. Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that declared a nationwide right to abortion, is... Read More

November 24, 2021
by Tom Ramstack
Supreme Court Sides With Tennessee in Dispute Over Aquifer Water Rights

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that Tennessee and Mississippi must limit their use of water from... Read More

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that Tennessee and Mississippi must limit their use of water from an underground aquifer to give each other a chance at it. The ruling takes on added significance as global warming makes water rights a touchier subject... Read More

News From The Well
Exit mobile version