I appreciate the feedback and discussion. Keep in mind that my comments to Robert were sent directly and not meant to be a comprehensive dissertation. Only so much needs to be said in that context. Robert asked if he could share my comments and I agreed. You can search and see that we have all discussed these issues at great length. In my comments, I was pointing out that the PA response had provided justification for the PA SC ruling and that supported the ruling on merit. It also made a case that Act 77 was believed to be constitutional when the Republican led legislature passed it (long before CoVid was a known thing).
In the first PA Act 77 case, the Rep legislators sued Boockvar for violating the provisions in Act 77 by making temporary accommodations during the pandemic (these were deemed necessary by the SotC and justified in her responsibility to ensure a safe and fair election). The Republicans sued Boockvar for not following Act 77 - never once suggesting it might be unconstitutional. The PA SC sided with Boockvar and the US SC voted 4-4 leaving the changes in place before the election (Chief Justice Roberts chose to let the temporary measures stand). In that regard, these issues being re-raised in the TX suit were already settled.
PA absolutely does signature verification. They also instituted a cure process where-in voters were notified of ballot rejections for whatever reason and allowed to come in and correct the issues. This is one of the complaints that Republicans made, because Boockvar sent out instructions to the whole state for curing. Rep-leaning counties chose not to follow the cure process, because they figured more mail-in ballots would be from Dems. When Biden won, they claimed that it was unfair that they chose not to follow the cure process.
Recounts, to my knowledge, never include signature verification. GA checked signatures on mail-in ballots when requested and when received.
It's not cheating when you follow your own state's laws.
