Republicans take Pennsylvania case to Supreme Court

After the most recent setback in the Pennsylvania courts, Republicans again petitioned the federal Supreme Court to block President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the state, although state attorneys consider it highly unlikely that ministers will agree to the petition due to the serious flaws in the original case.

Republican US Senator Mike Kelly of Northwest Pennsylvania and other plaintiffs are petitioning the Supreme Court to stop the state from certifying all disputed races in the Nov. 3 election, and to cancel certifications already made, such as the victory of Biden, while the lawsuit is being examined.

They argue that the extension of the vote-by-mail law in Pennsylvania is unconstitutional because it required a constitutional amendment to authorize its provisions.

However, in an indication that the case may be too late to affect the elections, Judge Samuel Alito ordered the state attorneys to respond by December 9, one day after what is known as the final date of electoral resolution. That means Congress cannot challenge any elector named on this date in accordance with state law.

Biden defeated President Donald Trump by more than 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania, a state the president had won in 2016. Most of the ballots sent by mail were from Democrats.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court had dismissed the case on Saturday. Kelly’s lawyers tried to petition the federal Supreme Court for an injunction on Tuesday, then backtracked and asked the state Supreme Court to hold back any certification pending the federal Supreme Court intervention.

State magistrates rejected the petition Thursday and Kelly’s attorneys immediately re-presented the case now before the federal Supreme Court.

In the state courts, the justices mentioned the 180-day limit set by the law to challenge its provisions, as well as the surprising requirement that the entire election be annulled retroactively.

In addition to challenging state vote-by-mail law, Kelly’s attorneys question whether state magistrates violated their clients’ constitutional rights by dismissing the case on the basis of time limits and preventing them from resubmitting it on the same grounds.

Home Office or back to office? Workers say

Hikers discover a metallic monolith in California, USA