The Supreme Court rationalize like children or, The US court is selfishness incarnate
So, here is the thing about the arguments the Republicans are making regarding mail ballots based on this article at Slate.
“the court held that Florida’s recount used procedures that violated “the equal dignity owed to each voter.” Because the standards used to recount ballots varied between counties, the court concluded, the process violated the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause. “
Being that “equal protection” is the issue as to getting a vote counted on election day such that a vote counted after election day is violating the “equal protection” of said voters on election day, then there is an issue for those who voted prior to election day via mail.
If mailing a ballot is considered a valid means of voting, and the Republicans and their judges are not arguing it is not, then the issue is time. The time issue is that no matter what, the process of mailing just can not deliver anything on the same day of mailing. 24 hours is the minimum.
That I’m allowed to mail a ballot including on the day of the election, but there is no way it can get there on the day of mailing, then to not count my ballot has, in the Bush v Gore ruling removed my equal protection. To force me to make judgement of an entity such as the post office as to how it will handle my mailing with out me having first hand knowledge of the intricacies of it’s processes has placed an undo burden on my right to use the mailing of a ballot as a means to vote.
There is no reasonable way for me to get first hand knowledge of the intricacies of the postal service such that I can make an informed determination as to when to mail the ballot. However, I should not have to make such a determination. I am allowed to use the postal system to vote. I am allowed to use the postal system on election day to mail my ballot. There is nothing that states I am not allowed too. Being that is the case, then my vote should be counted. To not count my vote is to penalize me for the apparent negligent operation of the postal service’s inability to deliver my vote on the same day. This penalty amounts to the grievous harm of unequal dignity toward my by my government thus a violation of my equal protection.
I can use the mail to vote. But I can not get the vote delivered on the day of mailing. The court needs to deal with this if they are going to keep insisting that the post mark of mail is not relied on for determining the time of which an official government document is in the hands of the government.
The other issue, is the post office is in the constitution. Thus, it is the government. To argue that a document in the hands of the post office is not in the hands of the government is to deny the post office as an appendage of the government. This creates problems all over the processes of government function. All of them time related. To deny that my ballot is not delivered when it is in the hands of the post office is to deny that the post office is representative of the US government. They have created a constitutional issue. That it is not in the hands of the state is not a valid argument as the states are only serving as fiduciaries of the US government as it relates to the US government holding an election. They are by all intent and purpose one in the same as it relates to the mechanics of operating an election. Thus the post office is by extension the depository for ballots for all states.
See how easy that is?
The latest ruling regarding ballot counting is an example of just how bad our judicial system is. The arguments that are passing for scholarly work are down right childish. The holes are huge. They are always of the same type of hole: massively void of appreciation for vastness of the human experience. These Federalist, originalist view themselves as enlightened as the founders. They are nothing but selfish children. I doubt they even know how to change a tire, never mind understanding rotating them.
“The latest ruling regarding ballot counting is an example of just how bad our judicial system is.”
Not easy to have good rulings when the conclusion is reached before you hear the case.
Yes, true. I experienced that in my divorce which led to our state supreme court and I won. Then I was ordered to pay the fees of the loosing attorney. Yes, our courts are F’d up.
But, if you are going to write a ruling to fit your pre-conclusion, at least do it with something more than an egocentric perspective.
Then again, if that were possible we would not have these rulings.
Hey, not easy to make “money is speech” into a non egocentric statement.
The IRS accepts post mark dates for meeting their legal deadlines but if one believes that the IRS is just an extortion racket instead of government agency then that would leave the USPS out in the cold for aiding and abetting the IRS.
The idea that the states are fiduciaries for the federal government in the area of election rules is completely wrong. The Constitution explicitly gives the power of determining the manner of selecting electors for President and Vice President to state legislatures. Many parts of the Constitution restrain or compel the states to create election laws that are compliant in areas like age, race, sex. But the only federal time requirement is that national Election Day be the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. The Post Office and its workers might be part of the government, but they are clearly not election officials empowered by any state (currently) to act as fiduciaries in any way. You take your chances on government red lights if you leave for the poll at 7:50 PM a week from today and you take your chances on the Post Office if you drop it off there next Tuesday.
Eric, yes you are correct. However, the point was that I can extend arguments to fit my out come just as the current courts are doing.
So, the post office does not have to be an election official to be considered as the government having received the document. The standard has been the post mark and not when what ever branch of the government will process and utilize the document has it in its hands. But, we have the Republican courts deciding to ignore this standard…out of selfish want.
Yes, states are separate and have the power to set the election process. However, if the Supremes are now claiming the power to overrule the states (and they are currently), then they have in their argument made the state a fiduciary of the Federal government for an election.
This gets me to my point. The republican/conservatives never look beyond their selfish wants and resulting manipulations to see the problems they create. Just like a child.
The clearest example is Justice Kagan having to point out the nonsense of Kavanaugh Wis. ruling. Kavanaugh is a child.