No. of Recommendations: 4
And Sam Alito calls it for what it is:
…today's decision leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine Americans' faith in the integrity of this country's elections. Diverse sources have recognized that mail-in ballots increase the potential for fraud.The case was
Watson v. RNC and it was a challenge to Mississippi's election laws:
supremecourt.gov: PDF documentt 72.
Finally, plaintiffs’ policy arguments about election integrity and
voter confidence are properly directed to legislatures, not courts, see,
e.g., SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, 584 U. S. 357, 368, and regardless,
plaintiffs’ definition of “election” would do little to address the concerns
they identify. Pp. 9–21.
(d) Plaintiffs argue that Mississippi’s election system violates the
election-day statutes because the Postal Service and common carriers
allow mail to be recalled before it is delivered to election officials,
meaning that the electorate’s choice is not actually made as of election
day. Even if plaintiffs are right about Mississippi law, they would still
lose the challenge they have pressed in this litigation: that post-elec
tion-day ballot receipt is itself unlawful. Post-election-day receipt, con
sidered on its own, does not conflict with the election-day statutes, and
state law is preempted only “‘so far as the conflict extends,’” Foster,
522 U. S., at 69. Pp. 21–22. In states such as California - where we've proven that you don't need a postmark, despite the howls of indignant denial from goobers on this board - you can harvest ballots all you want and take weeks to deliver a verdict.
This is now how every single blue state will conduct things. Thanks, John Roberts and ACB for destroying what was left of faith in our elections.
