Pa. appeals court hears ballot arguments

By PAULA REED WARD
Trib Total Media

A government attorney told an appellate court Thursday that no county elections board in Pennsylvania uses the handwritten date on the outer envelope of mail-in ballots for any purpose.

Why then, he asked, should a mistake in the date disallow a person’s vote?

“A rule that serves no purpose should not disenfranchise voters,” said Michael Fischer of the Pennsylvania Office of General Counsel. “That’s all we’re asking for here.”

A five-judge panel of the Commonwealth Court heard more than two hours of oral argument in a case that could have a significant impact nationally as Pennsylvania plays a starring role in this year’s general election.

In May, voters’ rights organizations sued the Pennsylvania Secretary of State and elections boards in Allegheny and Philadelphia counties. They claimed failure to count mail-in ballots with undated or misdated return envelopes resulted in 10,000 disenfranchised voters in the 2022 election and thousands more — the exact number is unknown — in this year’s primary.

The plaintiffs, which include the Black Political Empowerment Project, Common Cause and POWER Interfaith, seek to have the Commonwealth Court declare it unconstitutional under state law to reject a ballot for having an incorrect handwritten date on the outer envelope.

Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State, Al Schmidt, has taken the side of the petitioners in the case, arguing the date is irrelevant to the mail-in voting process.

However, the Republican National Committee and Republican Party, which were given permission to intervene in the case, argued the date requirement serves a variety of purposes and is required by the state Legislature that implemented mailin voting.

John Gore, a committee attorney, said the date serves several functions: ensuring a voter’s ballot was completed and submitted on time; attesting to the voter’s choices on the ballot; and detecting and deterring fraud.

Gore claimed, if the date is flagged as problematic, it could be used as confirmation of a fraudulent ballot.

“You can imagine scenarios where the date itself is relevant to some kind of challenge,” Gore said.

Gore urged the court to dismiss the petition, arguing the plaintiffs failed to show the date requirement is so unduly burdensome that it violates the state constitution.

“It does not make voting so difficult as to deny the franchise,” he said. “That the’s standard for the Free and Equal Elections standard here.”

The court said it would take the issue under advisement and issue its opinion as quickly as it can.

Disenfranchised

The lawsuit focused mainly on state constitutional claims, unlike several previous cases that sought relief under federal law.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, which represents the voting rights groups,