I get the point you making but do you understand what actually happened @DeathRhodes666

A lawsuit was filed, Governor rammed through the changes before the hearings/procedures were followed, and now it's biting them in the ass

There's plenty of precedent for this... For decades in the South, massive voter suppression was proven, but courts - though finding the cases valid - would not overturn the current election and instead tried to influence future ones. This "kick the can" approach was ineffective and required the US Congress to act with the Voting Rights Act. I am paraphrasing, but I think this is essentially correct.

@DeathRhodes666 no

The reason why it’s unconstitutional is because they never held a procedural vote. This change was made in 2019. It wasn’t a rushed thing @DeathRhodes666

So the governor accepted the changes, procedures weren't followed, lawsuit is now filed, and it's biting them in the ass. Had my order wrong

@DeathRhodes666, you just advanced to level 3!

@james j cite the source please

I think what you are talking about is the mail in vote extension that only effects 10000 votes. What they are talking about now is that all mail in votes are unconstitutional @DeathRhodes666

I watched rekita law @busillis

It was like his second to last video

???

Yeah it might be the white pill of hope

Had to turn off the last 3 hour video after 10 minutes of unrelated rambling.

I don’t remember I’ll have to sift though the videos @busillis

However it just a procedural thing not a malfeasance thing @busillis

The other thing the courts might take into consideration is that PA citizens acted in good faith by voting mail-in, because Act 77 was passed in Oct 2019 and no one appears to have challenged it beforehand. Obviously, some of the mail-in voters would have legitimately been able to vote that way with the old system. Also, it is a big stretch to say that a voter that utilized a mail-in ballot would not have voted in person otherwise. Lastly, I wonder if they used the same mail-in for the Primary this year and if there was no challenge then, it might have an effect now.

Bingo

@Zuluzeit, you just advanced to level 21!

@james j rekitan somewhere between Alan dershowitz and Howard Stern?

Lmao

@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