@busillis yeah he is a shitposter memer/lawyer

@TaLoN132 it was used in the primary

I'm not familiar, but I might have to check it out now... That should be their promotional slogan.

https://youtu.be/v0qncu6G_Rk

I assumed so... It's kind of sour grapes to wait until you don't get the outcome you want to complain.

Fair points. A timeline of when the most recent easing of standards was applied and when the primaries took place would help clarify the latter of your points. It could be that the primaries weren't as important as the general election is.

@james j tks for the info/link

Thanks... I'll check it out later.

@DeathRhodes666 these changes were made in 2019

Pre pandemic

I get that

By gop legislators

'Observing constitutionality is only appropriate if the election was important.' - The Right

They knew and they held onto it as a silver bullet. No bueno.

Does anyone know if a risk limiting audit has been performed in PA yet?

They never finished the process to amend the constitution

You do know that just because it came from the party that pushed for it doesn't mean it was legal

There is nothing illegal about passing the legislation, they just forgot to vote again @DeathRhodes666

Which is why it’s now just a technicality

A procedural error

And the bigger point definitely not fraud

So they were incompetent or endeavoring a setup. Incompetence seems like the better defense for them imo.

I'm not following the "having forgotten to vote again" thing... I may not have read far enough. What does that mean?

It still needs settled and remedied.

@TaLoN132 they are supposed to hold two hearing to officially amend the constitution and they just didn’t hold the second hearing

you're missing the other parts required to certify the amendment. It isn't just "two hearing" needed.

The remedy is to make sure all technical procedure is followed and to not forget about it. @DeathRhodes666 the second hearing not being held is why the amendment to the constitution was never official

@james j In the ruling they outlined the steps for Amending the Constitution, which involved 2 votes to get it onto a ballot *and* it has to be published for 3 months ahead of an election where it is put on a ballot to be decided by the voters.

Yeah

Both hearings require it be published in the paper

I’ll have to watch the rekita video again

And then voted on as a ballot question on the next election.

There are some other tiny stipulations present

I don’t think it’s gets voted on by the people

In any election

From the ruling, *" Specifically, pursuant to Article XI, Section 1, a proposed constitutional amendment must be approved by a majority vote of the members of both the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate in two consecutive legislative sessions, then the proposed amendment must be published for three months ahead of the next general election in two newspapers in each county, and finally it must be submitted to the qualified electors as a ballot question in the next general election and approved by a majority of those voting on the amendment"*

That statute makes it seem that this amendment wouldn't take effect until the 2024 GE as the 2020 GE would have certified the amendment

Right two legislative sessions where the electors vote

Not electors. The State House and Senate. Unless they are the electors

Submitted to qualified electors

The ruling also says that the complaint seems to assert that this is a first step in trying to get to universal mail-in voting, which is a slippery slope argument that seems odd, in this context. If it is unconstitutional, this shouldn't matter.

Did Pennsylvania even have universal mail in voting