# How big of a deal is today’s Supreme Court decision to allow PA vote count? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 20, 2020, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373 "2020-10-20T01:22:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/61 "2020-10-27T19:57:18Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Then the Electoral College would just become a watered-down version of the popular vote, and redundant. You say that like it’s a bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/62 "2020-10-27T20:08:46Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If they did, wouldn’t the 14th Amendment strip them of half of their representatives? (Only half because the amendment is specific about males being denied.) In my own opinion, the right to vote enumerated in the Constitution does not _necessarily_ extend to presidential elections. If a state decides to award its electors based on a statewide vote, then the right to vote is implicated. Contrast with, say, the election of representatives for the House or Senate which necessarily involve the right to vote (see Art I sec 2 cl 1, “by the People of the several States”; and Amendment 17, “from each State, elected by the people thereof”). ~Max ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/63 "2020-10-27T20:17:13Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > **Velocity** was warned for that line of posts. Have you been asked to speak on his behalf, then? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/64 "2020-10-27T20:18:20Z")
Nope. I thought, had you known he was warned, perhaps you wouldn’t have made your post. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/65 "2020-10-27T21:24:14Z")
It’s not an extension, it’s explicit. > [@](#): > > when the right to vote at any election for the _ **choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States,** _ Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. My emphasis. Given that it specifically mentions presidential elections, can you explain how your opinion is at odds to that? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/66 "2020-10-27T21:58:55Z")
Just as there isn’t necessarily an election for every executive and judicial officer of every state, there isn’t necessarily an election for the electors for President and Vice President of the United States. ~~Heck, before the Seventeenth Amendment there weren’t always elections for Senators. Surely the Seventeenth Amendment wasn’t an idle enactment?~~ ETA: nvm, capital “R” for Representatives. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/67 "2020-10-27T22:00:45Z")
Which may be one of the reasons why Senators are not mentioned in the 14th amendment. But the electors for president are. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/68 "2020-10-27T22:03:29Z")
Okay, so your contention is that the state legislators can just pick whoever they want for electors for president, without having the citizens vote? Does this extend to other offices? Can the state just choose all of its own legislators and executives, and not bother to hold elections and bother the citizenry with all this pesky suffrage stuff? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2020, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/69 "2020-10-27T22:11:08Z")
Pretty much. There’s Art 4 which some use to say the states have to have a republican form of government, but I disagree with that interpretation too. I do not think the U.S. Constitution guarantees the individual right to vote in state elections, unless there _are_ state elections. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2020, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/70 "2020-10-28T08:09:22Z")
How weird is it that “Postmarked by Election Day” isn’t considered a qualifying criterion in EVERY state? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2020, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/71 "2020-10-28T14:20:18Z")
I’m taking from this that you are claiming that a dictatorship would be in line with the constitution? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2020, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/72 "2020-10-28T20:13:24Z")
I’m not willing to say all forms of dictatorship are unconstitutional. If you want to go into details, we’ll have to move this to a separate topic. If you just wanted that admission, well, there you have it. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 9:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/73 "2020-10-29T09:17:14Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > How weird is it that “Postmarked by Election Day” isn’t considered a qualifying criterion in EVERY state? Not weird at all. Postmarks are far from perfect. Not all mail gets one and they’re often illegible. Anyway, Oregon was the first state to go to All Vote-by-Mail and Election Day has always been the deadline to get the ballots turned in. Postmarks don’t mean diddly. We’ve been doing it that way since 1999 and no one’s complained. It hasn’t even come up in this year when lots of other states suddenly are doing lots of VbM. BTW, the second state to do all VbM (Washington) does do the postmark thing. But they do other things differently. For example, they rolled it out on a county-by-county basis rather than the whole state at once. I forget which year they finally got all counties doing it, either 12 or 14, I think. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/74 "2020-10-29T12:49:05Z")
Well, I’ll be happy to leave it there, for fear that the Republican members of SCOTUS will be cribbing your notes. ---
**Author:** ![Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/marvin_the_martian/32/2898_2.png) [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marvin_the_Martian)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/75 "2020-10-29T16:56:22Z")
> [@dtilque](#): > > Not weird at all. Postmarks are far from perfect. Not all mail gets one and they’re often illegible. Arizona’s ballots are sent back as “Business Reply Mail” (i.e., no stamp required). Do these even get postmarked? Of course, it doesn’t really matter since AZ requires ballots be received by 8:00PM on election day. Even in normal elections you are constantly nagged to get your vote in the mail seven days ahead of the election day. It’s drilled into our heads so hard that I can’t conceive of someone actually mailing in a ballot late. ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/76 "2020-10-29T20:58:52Z")
I don’t know if I’m reading too much into individual rulings but [the fact that the SCOTUS just ruled 5-3 to keep a North Carolina mail-in extension in place is giving me hope](https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/10/court-wont-block-extended-deadline-for-north-carolina-mail-in-ballots/). Roberts and Kavanaugh joined the 3 liberals. It seems like Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas are going to narrowly rule based on whatever a state legislature decides but Kavanaugh _might_ become a wildcard. I’m having a tough time pinning down Kavanaugh’s logic - he at the very least seems to have accepted that his “flipping the election” statement earlier was wrong. The voter confusion angle to me indicates that they will not change their minds on Pennsylvania. I also don’t know what this says about the potential for a state legislature to appoint it’s own electors in spite of the popular vote. Honestly I still think they want to not make a decision but if you force them to they rule for a Republican legislature over voters - by this thinking they would allow state legislature to override the vote because it would probably be a suit against the state by Biden. I think if the SCOTUS is concerned about voter confusion, they should also be concerned about undermining the expectations of voters, which I think is a legal opinion that opposes the idea of legislatures changing their electoral college appointment process after an election, but I could also see Kavanaugh just going the other way on that for whatever reason. This may be wishful thinking but I think we have hit the high-water mark on when ballot deadlines occur and when ballots will be thrown out, but the “generate confusion and then have the legislature appont electors” strategy might still be on the table. Hopefully enough swing states will go to Biden and the narrative of a Biden blowout coupled with the amount of work required to get legislatures behind this in many different states will be insurmountable. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/77 "2020-10-29T22:23:52Z")
What is the other side? That seems so obviously true, I would like to hear if there is another side. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/78 "2020-10-29T23:33:07Z")
The other side is that state constitutions actually mean something, and if the legislature passes a law that violates it the state supreme court can overturn that law. Which, to me, seems obviously true. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2020, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/79 "2020-10-30T00:43:49Z")
So when the constitution said state legislature it actually meant the state legislature unless the state supreme court disagrees? I was hoping it was more rational. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2020, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373/80 "2020-10-30T00:58:09Z")
> [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](#): > > However, does today’s decision set a precedent for other states? If so, is that a big win for Democrats? I don’t know about the precedent as it affects other States, but the actual counting of votes is usually a big win for Democrats. Why, oh why, would Republicans spend so much time and resource trying to prevent it, if it weren’t so? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-big-of-a-deal-is-today-s-supreme-court-decision-to-allow-pa-vote-count/923373.md?page=5)