Pennsylvania Supreme Court says ballots can’t be rejected based on signature comparisons
[www.politico.com]

The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court ruled Friday that ballots in the state cannot be rejected because of signature comparisons, backing up guidance issued by the state’s chief elections officer heading into Pennsylvania’s first presidential election with no-excuse mail voting.

The ruling is a defeat for President Donald Trump’s campaign and other Republicans, who had challenged the decision by Pennsylvania election officials, arguing that efforts to match signatures on ballots to signatures on voter rolls were necessary to prevent fraud.

The court directs “the county boards of elections not to reject absentee or mail-in ballots for counting, computing, and tallying based on signature comparisons conducted by county election officials or employees, or as the result of third party challenges based on such comparisons.”

.........aaaaand we tee up SCotUS case #2 from PA.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
rjmacs
.........aaaaand we tee up SCotUS case #2 from PA.

My thoughts exactly.

NO VOTING FOR TRUMP !!!!

Compare this



To this


Yes, both his 'legal signature'

Well, if you are a Supreme Court justice and really an originalist, you ought to believe that election methodology is something that belongs to the states. The conservatives have certainly been willing to allow states to do all sorts of voter suppression, particularly including limiting the number of polling places in minority districts, requiring picture ID, and all that stuff.

And these people probably never even stop to think for a second that many states do not even have signed ballots. A poll worker glances at your ID signature (maybe) and the X you scribble on the sign-in sheet (maybe) and onward you go, to an electronic machine.

Consistency? Control over the process? Nah, let’s invent everything all over again and retain a patchwork methodology for electing presidents.