[ April 16, 2024 ]
The hallmark of Chief Justice Roberts’ court is the same affliction suffered by RINOs – weak, afraid and devoid of conviction. The greatness that defines this exceptional nation requires strong shoulders, fortitude and bravery.
We have yet to have our day in court.
Pennsylvania Republicans Ask Supreme Court to Again Review Election Lawsuit
By Janita Kan, The Epoch Times, December 15, 2020
Story continues below advertisementA group of Republicans in Pennsylvania on Tuesday has again urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up their lawsuit that challenges the 2020 election results in the state.
The nation’s top court had previously rejected the group’s request for immediate injunctive relief to block Pennsylvania from taking further steps to certify the 2020 election results. At the time, the group’s lawyer, Greg Teufel, said the case was not over because his clients were planning to file a formal petition to ask the court to review the lawsuit, which they hadn’t filed the first time.
The lawyer filed a petition for a writ of certiorari on Dec. 11, docketed by the court on Dec. 15, which argues that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was wrong when it dismissed their case because the justices thought the plaintiffs filed their case with unreasonable delay.
“This Court should not turn a blind eye to unconstitutional election laws that permit massive vote dilution and have a significant impact on election outcomes, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court did,” the petition (pdf) states.
The case at hand—cited as Kelly v. Pennsylvania—argues that Act 77, a law that made voting by mail without an excuse legal in Pennsylvania, was enacted in violation of Pennsylvania’s constitution. The state constitution, the plaintiffs argue, prohibits absentee voting in Pennsylvania except for four limited circumstances.
The lawsuit alleges that the state law is “another illegal attempt to override the limitations on absentee voting prescribed in the Pennsylvania Constitution, without first following the necessary procedure to amend the constitution to allow for the expansion.”
The lawsuit was filed by a Republican lawmaker Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) and several GOP congressional candidates.
In late November a Pennsylvania commonwealth judge, Patricia McCullough, issued a temporary injunction that would have prevented the state from taking further steps to complete the certification of the presidential race. She argued that “petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment.”
She also opined that the “petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene” the plain language of the provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which deals with absentee voting.
However, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs waited too long before the county of boards of election were required to certify the election results to bring the case, which could “result in the disenfranchisement of millions of Pennsylvania voters” who voted by mail.
In the petition, the lawyer argued that it was a no-win situation for his clients, who wanted to bring the case against the law.
“Pennsylvania does not permit electors and candidates to bring substantive constitutional challenges to laws governing the conduct of federal elections. An elector or candidate may not bring a challenge prior to an election for failure to meet standing requirements,” he wrote, referring to the legal right—or standing—to bring the case.
“To overcome such speculative harm requires waiting until after the election takes place. But now that harm has materialized and is no longer speculative, it is too late,” he added.
The group has asked the court to declare Act 77 as unconstitutional in order to prevent future harm resulting from the law. It also asks the court to grant injunctive relief to mitigate current harms already caused by the state law.
They argued that when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed the case they had “insulated the legislation from any attack” and indirectly “amended” the Pennsylvania Constitution despite not having the authority to do so.
“Such attempted de facto constitutional amendment is itself unconstitutional,” they argued.
This case is cited as Kelly v. Pennsylvania (20-810).
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
or
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.
Follow Pamela Geller on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
13 Comments
3 years ago
what good are laws if there is no penalty?
3 years ago
Reply to
Halal Bacon
Oh don’t worry, if you are a conservative the penalties will apply, with extreme prejudice.
3 years ago
Well, they can’t deny standing with PA bringing it up directly. They can’t deny the PA state legislature didn’t suffer direct harm. They can’t deny the DEM PA Gov. and the DEM PA. Secretary of State didn’t usurp the Constitutional right of the Pa state legislature to appoint the electors without an Amendment and arbitrarily changing the rules and there is no time limit for the state legislature to object to that…. The U.S. Court Jesters can’t deny they don’t have jurisdiction over this problem since it is a Constitutional problem.
What excuse will they come up with this time? Or will they just dismiss it without any reason, taking the ultimate galling and cowardly way out? If they do, what is the point of having the U.S.Supreme Court Jesters if they refuse to rule on Constitutional issues? It’s the only court to take up issues with others states to be resolved that are Constitutional issue.
3 years ago
Reply to
felix1999
They don’t need an excuse. They are DemoNazi Trojan horses, working to promulgate the Globalist agenda.
Trump was duped by all his picks.
Did anyone see the picture of that scum Roberts on pedophile island with slick Willy?
Check it out: https://richardsonpost.com/howellwoltz/19453/roberts-scotus-are-compromised/
3 years ago
Reply to
Fount
My understanding is the Federalist Society does the initial recommendations and then it goes to our representatives to confirm. Guess they are useless too…
3 years ago
Reply to
Fount
It was George W. Bush who chose this scum Roberts
But the other picks were Donway, kavanaugh and Gorsuch were bad
3 years ago
Reply to
felix1999
They’re just biding their time until ” uncle china joe ” yet another uncle joe – reminds me of the first one..Who remarked completely prophetically – its who counts the votes that matters – Completes the countries biggest heist in its history and then all of this will go away.Banana republic here we come
3 years ago
What exactly do they get paid for?
Let me tell you I am not impressed with President Trump’s picks. There is not one Alito or Thomas amongst them. These are soft picks. They lack conviction. You’ll see them drift to the Robert’s camp over time.
Disappointments all.
3 years ago
It’s way too late, but what some of the real Ameircans in Congress need to do is to find out what it is that Obama and his socialist cult are using to blackmail him to do their bidding. Did they find out that he’a some kind of pervert? or cheating on his wife? or he’s been stealing funds from some government agency? or maybe all the above???
Whatever it is, it needs to become public knowledge now!
3 years ago
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
How many times do they have to lose?
3 years ago
AG Shapiro should buy a kevlar vest. So should his side-kick Wolf. Two treasonous AH’s who will be dealt with.
