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
Topics:
Daniel Becker considers the following as important: 2020 Election, Amy Coney Barrett, Daniel Becker, law, Mail ballots, politics
This could be interesting, too:
Angry Bear writes Planned Tariffs, An Economy Argument with Political Implications
Joel Eissenberg writes Will DOGE be an exercise in futility?
Bill Haskell writes The spider’s web called Healthcare Insurance
Bill Haskell writes Funding Public Goods Problematic??? Blame the Tax-Dodging Billionaire
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.