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

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