Get 40% Off
🤯 This Tech Portfolio is up 29% YTD! Join Now to Get April’s Top PicksGet The Picks – Just 99 USD

U.S. Supreme Court brings end to another Republican election challenge

Published 04/19/2021, 11:17 AM
Updated 04/19/2021, 11:40 AM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen behind a window in Washington

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen behind a window in Washington

By Andrew Chung

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday brought an end to another lawsuit related to the Nov. 3 presidential election filed by a Republican former congressional candidate who had challenged the extension of Pennsylvania's deadline to receive mail-in ballots.

The justices, in a brief order, decided that the dispute was moot. They threw out a Nov. 13 decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that found the candidate, Jim Bognet, as well as four individual voters, did not have legal standing to challenge the ballot deadline extension.

Bognet, who lost his race for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives to Democratic rival Matt Cartwright, and the voters had filed the suit before the election, challenging a Sept. 17 ruling by Pennsylvania's top court ordering officials to count mail-in ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and received up to three days later.

The high court's action in the lingering dispute was expected as it has previously rejected many others pursued by former President Donald Trump and his allies related to the presidential election.

Trump, a Republican, lost his re-election bid to Democrat Joe Biden, who took office on Jan. 20. Biden defeated Trump by more than 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Trump made false claims that the election was stolen from him through widespread voting fraud and irregularities.

The election dispute in Pennsylvania, like in several other states, involved changes implemented to facilitate voting during the coronavirus pandemic, a public health crisis that prompted a surge in mail-in ballots as voters sought to avoid crowded polling places.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court sided with the state's Democratic Party and various Democratic officials and candidates who argued that an Election Day mail-in ballot receipt deadline would violate the state constitution's guarantee of "free and equal" elections given the pandemic and warnings by the U.S. Postal Service over its ability to deliver ballots in time.

The 3rd Circuit in its ruling against Bognet and the voters said that they cannot represent the state legislature, whose power they claimed had been undermined by the state court.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen behind a window in Washington

"Because plaintiffs are not the General Assembly, nor do they bear any conceivable relationship to state lawmaking processes, they lack standing to sue over the alleged usurpation of the General Assembly's rights," the 3rd Circuit said.

Latest comments

for ape-man supporters: u wouldn't have had a problem with this if he would have one which be definition makes ur argument biased and moot
the supreme Court failed the constitution
Unconstitutionally changing voting laws is cheating...
Tell us where it says in the Constitution that you can't change the deadline for receiving votes later as long as they've been cast by voting day? And it's not 'cheating' when votes for either party can use the law change equally - which they could in this case. If they changed the law to say only votes for Democrats can be received 3 days later, then you could claim it was cheating. But that's not the case.
Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.