Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules Mail-In Ballots with Incorrect or Missing Dates Disqualified
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Friday ruled, 4-3, that voters must write in the correct date on their mail-in ballots in order for them to be counted.
The ruling overturned a lower court’s 4-1 decision last month in the battleground state that found a requirement for voters to write the correct date on their mail-in ballots in order for them to be counted is unconstitutional.
The Commonwealth Court ruled in favor of petitioners that included the Black Political Empowerment Project, POWER Interfaith, Casa San José, League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, and Common Cause Pennsylvania, asserting “[t]he fundamental right to vote guaranteed by our Constitution is at issue” in the case.
The state Supreme Court found the lower court had no authority to review the case, “given the failure to name the county boards of elections of all 67 counties” as defendants, and that the naming of Al Schmidt, the Secretary of the Commonwealth, alone, was insufficient.
The Commonwealth Court determined that the date on the mail-in ballot envelope is not a significant indication of “the timeliness of a ballot, a voter’s qualifications/eligibility to vote, or fraud.”
“Therefore, the dating provisions serve no compelling government interest,” the court continued. “The refusal to count undated or incorrectly dated but timely mail ballots submitted by otherwise eligible voters because of meaningless and inconsequential paperwork errors violates the fundamental right to vote recognized in the free and equal elections clause.”
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) said it was “unfortunate” the state Supreme Court did not rule in favor of the petitioners, reported WFMZ News.
“It should be clear that voters who make an inconsequential dating error deserve to still have their valid vote counted,” Shapiro reportedly said in a statement to Votebeat and Spotlight PA.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice David Wecht (D) dissented from the order vacating the Commonwealth Court’s decision, and, joined by Chief Justice Debra Todd (D) and Justice Christine Donohue (D), argued that the court had ruled on a technicality, rather than on the constitutional question brought forward in the appeal.
“A prompt and definitive ruling on the constitutional question presented in this appeal is of paramount public importance inasmuch as it will affect the counting of ballots in the upcoming general election,” Wecht wrote. “Therefore, I would exercise this Court’s King Bench authority over the instant dispute and order that the matter be submitted on the briefs.”
The Epoch Times notes King’s Bench authority is “a broader and more powerful tool” that “allows the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to step in and rule on urgent matters of public importance at any stage of a case, even if procedural hurdles exist.”
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Pennsylvania, which served as co-counsel to the plaintiffs, said in a statement about the case in May that “the handwritten date requirement has led to the disqualification of the ballots of tens of thousands of Pennsylvania voters who were otherwise eligible and returned their ballots by the deadline, including over 10,000 in the 2022 general election alone.”
A New York Times report observed that the plaintiffs “could file a new lawsuit that addresses the jurisdiction issue, but whether they will do so is unclear.”
However, in a joint statement applauding the state Supreme Court’s ruling, Michael Whatley, chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and co-chair Lara Trump said the decision amounts to an “election integrity win in Pennsylvania.”
The Republican leaders cited the Pennsylvania law that requires voters to sign and date mail-in ballots as “an important election integrity safeguard.”
"This is a huge win to protect the vote in Pennsylvania that will secure commonsense mail ballot safeguards and help voters cast their ballots with confidence,” Whatley and Trump stated. “The Keystone State will be absolutely critical in this election, and the Supreme Court has decided a major victory for election integrity."