The Supreme Court will not extend Wisconsin’s deadline for postal voting

Washington – Supreme Court Refused on Monday To update Judgment of the trial court The deadline to get a Wisconsin-free ballot would have been extended to six days before the election.

With votes 5 to 3, the Conservative judges of the court were in the majority. As usual, The court’s brief, unsigned order stated no reason. But several judges filed similar and dissenting pages of 35 pages and expressed a clear split in the understanding of the role of the courts in protecting the right to vote during an epidemic.

The ruling was seen as an important oscillating state victory for Republicans, which led Mr. Shows that Trump is lagging behind In 2016 it won by a margin of about 23,000 votes.

Wisconsin Democrats immediately announced a voter education program to warn voters not to cast ballots by 8pm on November 3 election day. “We are dialing in a big voter education campaign,” said Ben Wickler, state party leader. Said on Twitter. The U.S. Postal Service has recommended that voters send in their ballots by Oct. 27.

The ruling comes as President Trump continues to attack the Democrats’ most-used postal vote this year. In a tweet late Monday, Mr Trump said Falsely reported “There were big issues and contradictions in the mail’s ballot across the United States. The final total should be on November 3rd. ”(Twitter quickly put a warning label on the tweet.)

The ruling is the latest in a series of election year results that have largely confirmed voting restrictions, and the Trump campaign and its Republican allies are seeking similar restrictions on ballot deadlines in other states. Cases from North Carolina and Pennsylvania are pending in court, the latter being a second attempt After 4 to 4 blockages last week. Judge Amy Connie Barrett, who Confirmed and sworn in the Supreme Court Monday night, can vote decisively in that case.

In Monday’s comments, the vote – related divisions pointed out in some previous rulings were still openly open.

In only one consideration, Judge Neil M. Korsuk, Judge Brett M. Together with Kavanagh, he wrote that federal trial judges should not change state voting rules when an election takes place. “Elections must end seldom, a deadline gives clear notice, and the need for votes on election day brings all voters to the same level,” Judge Korsch wrote.

“No one doubts that holding a national election in the midst of an epidemic poses serious challenges,” he wrote. “But none of that. Individual judges can improve their own election rules instead of where the people’s representatives have agreed.”

In a separate collaboration, Judge Kavanagh wrote, “The Constitution primarily entrusts politically responsible state legislatures, not elected federal judges, with the responsibility of addressing the health and safety of the people during the Govt-19 epidemics.”

In previous cases related to Wisconsin’s primary elections in April, Court required Ballots will be mailed and postmarked by Election Day. But it did not bother with a similar six-day extension to get the ballots, which had not been challenged in the case before.

In a disagreement on Monday, Judges Stephen G. Judge Elena Kagan, along with Fryer and Sonia Sotomayor, said they would report on the state’s experience in April.

“The extension of Wisconsin ‘ballot-receipt deadline ensures that delays in the issuance and processing of postal ballots do not exclude citizens who are afraid to vote in person,” Judge Kagan wrote. “Because of the court ruling, state officials counted 80,000 votes – 5 percent of the total cast – they were postmarked by election day, but they would have been rejected for coming a few days later.”

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. filed a brief comment explaining why the case of Wisconsin is different from Pennsylvania. The judges were disabled On whether the state Supreme Court can extend the deadline for postal voting to three days.

“Although the Pennsylvania applications include the power of the state courts to apply their own constitutions to electoral regulations, this case involves federal infiltration of state legislative processes,” the Chief Justice wrote. “Different legal systems and different forerunners manage these two situations, and in these particular circumstances, we must allow changes to electoral rules in Pennsylvania, but not Wisconsin.”

The Federal Court of Appeals in Chicago had a three-judge panel The trial court upheld the verdict In the case of Wisconsin, this comes very close to the election and refers to judicial intervention “in a task for selected branches of government.”

The Supreme Court’s order on Monday allowed the appellate court’s ruling to be upheld, resuming the difficult deadline for accepting absentee ballots by 8pm on November 3, the end of voting.

The majority of the Court of Appeal, Judges Frank H. Easter Brooke and Amy J. In the opinion not signed with St. Eve, the trial judge said the extension was improper.

“Voters have several months from March to register or receive non-voting votes; reading the constitution to extend the deadline before the election makes it difficult to justify long-term voter turnout, which protects social distance,” the judges wrote. The district court did not find that it was not possible. Plan ahead and take advantage of opportunities allowed by state law. “

Disagreeing, Judge Ilana D. Rowner replied, “No citizen has to choose between her health and her right to vote.”

“The inevitable consequence of today’s court ruling is that many thousands of Wisconsin citizens will lose their right to vote, even if they do everything they can to justify it,” Judge Rowner wrote. “It’s a pity.”

In his approval on Monday, he criticized Judge Kavanagh’s rhetoric of “voting” by Judge Gagan.

He replied that he did not refer to rhetoric, nor did he refer to rhetoric.

“During the Govt period, the state vote-receipt deadline and the court’s ruling excluded citizens by stripping them of their constitutionally guaranteed right to vote,” he wrote. “The court’s refusal to reinstate the district court’s restraining order will result in the expulsion of thousands of Wisconsin’s requested and timely mailed ballots.”

Nick Corazanity contributed to reporting from Philadelphia and Stephanie Saul from New York.