Weeks after the mainstream media called last month’s presidential election for Democratic nominee Joe Biden, challenges remain ongoing in swing states across the nation.
Republicans in Pennsylvania, for example, recently took their fight over the state’s election returns to the U.S. Supreme Court, as reported by the Washington Examiner.
A last-minute appeal
U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) appealed the state Supreme Court’s dismissal of a case involving mail-in ballots, landing the challenge before the nation’s highest court.
Along with Kelly, other GOP officials in Pennsylvania argued that a law passed last year allowing no-excuse mail-in voting was illegal without an amendment to the state constitution, the Examiner reported.
Plaintiffs in the case are calling for a halt in the election certification process — effectively tossing out some 2.5 million ballots — or an allowance for the GOP-led state legislature to appoint electors. Pennsylvania’s race was certified as a win for Biden by a margin of roughly 80,000 votes, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
The congressman made his emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday after Pennsylvania’s top court dismissed the case three days earlier. That court also reversed an order from Pennsylvania Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough aimed at stopping the state’s results from being certified, as the Examiner noted.
Although the state Supreme Court’s conservative wing sympathized with the plaintiffs on constitutional grounds, the ruling was nevertheless unanimous based on the determination that they waited too long to make their case.
“An actual injury or harm”
Furthermore, the court found that granting the request would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of voters.
Greg Teufel, an attorney for the plaintiffs, argued that his clients were operating within a tight window because they lacked standing in the court prior to the election.
“In order to bring a claim, a party has to show that you have an actual injury or harm,” he told the Examiner.
Kelly included in his petition a request for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to stay its decision while the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether to take up the appeal.
The appeal request reportedly states: “In so passing Act 77, Respondents disenfranchised the entire Pennsylvania electorate, who were entitled to a constitutionally-mandated vote to approve this sweeping change to absentee voting before it was implemented.”