There is a lot of conflicting information about a recent 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (5th CCA) ruling that remands a lower court opinion back to the State of Mississippi. You can read the 5th CCA RULING HERE.
The appellate judges stated that “Election Day,” as designated by Congress, is the last day ballots can be received by state officials. “Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials,” the court wrote, adding that Mississippi’s policy allowing ballots to arrive up to five days later is in conflict with federal law.
While the 5th CCA has jurisdiction over Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, the decision only impacts Mississippi should the federal district court judge agree to bar the state from counting late-arriving mail-in ballots. Yes, it is a win for Mississippi election integrity, but -no- it is unlikely to have a major impact on the overall election.
The ruling only applies to Mississippi, and the decision simply reverses the previous ruling and remands the issue back to the judge. I hope that helps clear up any confusion.
MASSIVE WIN: 5th Circuit Court rules ALL BALLOTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY ELECTION DAY.
If any state has laws that allow ballots to be received and / or counted after Election Day they are now in direct violation of federal law. pic.twitter.com/gQPEcW9m2I
— True the Vote (@TrueTheVote) October 25, 2024
Retired Magistrate here: Well, it’s a good start.
Setting precedent and illuminating the Constitution, n’est-ce pas?
Definitely good.
Yes. Sets precedent. But too late to make this law in all 49 of the other states by election day.
Yes, this combined with the last decision begs the question, why are the courts always splitting the baby?
Too many courts have been corrupted……..
Cowardice.
Thanks for the clarification@sundance I just hope the other states that allow ballots to be counted after the election learn from this ruling. However, I know they will not learn anything and they don’t care.
Well, there’s another positive development in yet another state, despite all of those same recurring folks who keep saying and insisting nothing is being done anywhere and it’s all futile (sky falling).
😏 😏 😏
Just need this to be enacted in PA, MI, WI and AZ
Naturally it’s a state probably going 60+% for Trump.
But as noted….it’s a start.
We never win. The US Constitution is never, UNIVERSALLY upheld among all 50 States and US territories. Nothing the courts do ever reinforces the law and US Constitution, without allowing some “caveat” that allows the Communists to run circles around it. On the other hand, every clearly unconstitutional judicial decision at the Federal level, immediately becomes binding for all 50 states. After perhaps a half dozen years, it might be overturned, after $millions are spent to do so.
This sh*t has been going on for over 100 years.
Yeah, I guess that’s why they’re always splitting the baby. They keep splitting the baby till there’s nothing left.
The 5th C decision places a marker on the table. Now when some leftist court someplace else rules ballots can be received and counted weeks later the 5th C decision exists as a pre-existing contradictory ruling. There is no guarantee but that greatly increases the chances the Supreme Court will need to rule to resolve the contradiction between circuits.
On Jan 25,2019, the Hawaii Supreme Court invalidated Trevor Ozawa’s 22-vote victory over Tommy Waters in Honolulu City Council District 4 (Hawaii Kai, Kahala, Kaimuki) because 350 mail-in ballots were received late after polls closed at 6 pm on Nov 6, 2018
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/01/25/breaking-news/hawaii-supreme-court-invalidates-trevor-ozawas-22-vote-victory-over-tommy-waters/
In this Hawaii case, 350 mail-in ballots were postmarked before 6 pm but received late after polls closed at 6 pm and they should not have be counted.
In the 5 States above, mail-in ballots were received after polls closed were been counted .. Were those mail-in ballots postmarked before polls closed and received late? Then those late mail-in ballots should not have been counted like in Hawaii.
Jack Cashill wrote:
“Abraham Lincoln knew the results of the 1860 election before he went to bed on election night 1860.. One hundred and sixty years later, votes were still being counted a week or more after the election.”
(“Trump Should Talk More January 6, Not Less” , April 6, 2024, American Thinker)
Why couldn’t the 21st Century State of Art computers count the mail-in ballots whether millions or thousands on time on Nov 3, 2020?
If there was no election fraud in 2020, Joe Biden should have won on Nov 3 not 4 days later. on Nov 7.
The 2020 Election Fraud was Biden winning on Nov 7, 2020.
I was looking for that quote again by way of comparison. couldn’t recall who wrote it thank you.
“Jack Cashill wrote:
“Abraham Lincoln knew the results of the 1860 election before he went to bed on election night 1860.. One hundred and sixty years later, votes were still being counted a week or more after the election.”
(“Trump Should Talk More January 6, Not Less” , April 6, 2024, American Thinker)”
Joe Biden didn’t “win” on November 7th he was DECLARED A WINNER by the Associated Press (AP).
https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/updates/2024/how-the-ap-declares-election-winners-a-commitment-to-certainty/
I have new confusion.
If this ruling sends it back to the district judge? is it the same judge who has ruled already and caused the appeal to be mounted? It seems Federal judges are already running roughshod. What’s this recent VA judge ruled 1700 non citizens taken off of voter rolls? now to be placed back on. Enough with your silly laws! We’re in charge now.
To top it off. This ruling will not impact the 2024 election. If they steal this again, any election after this, will be purely vestigial anyway. Is this ruling a pyrrhic precedent.
I haven’t seen anyone comment on exactly what this ruling says. Everyone gets caught up in the after election day voting.
“this day for the election is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials.”
The court ruled one day to both cast and receive the vote. No early voting. No late receiving.
Not the way I read it
“the day by which ballots must be both cast … and received”
“the day by which” is equivalent to “the last day that”
it prohibits LATE counting and receipt
I don’t see any proscription against early voting
At least in that excerpt … if it’s prohibited in some of the other language, then I’ll stand corrected
I expect you are correct.
That big little two letter word “by” is what it hinges on.
Which definition of “by” do you use.
Did we really need a federal appeals court to tell them it’s Election Day not Election Week?
To me “Day for the Election” means everyone can vote on that day, not other days. No more month or so prior to or after.
This is a great ruling, since liberals, masters of voter fraud, are obsessed with turning election day, into election month and beyond.
I am a Brit. We cast our votes on Thursday – mostly in person – people count paper ballots and the result is known by almost all counts by about 5am the next day. How hard can it be?
Welcome to the Treehouse mongoose! 😀
As hard as the Communists can make it!
I would also argue it de facto applies to TX and LA for any suits that may be filed in the future. That is now the case law of the circuit.
Also, interesting with the description of “Election Day”, I’ve always thought early voting didn’t fit for federal elections.
“Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials,”
The same lawsuit needs to be pursued in as many states as practical.
And Trump should do immediately after 11/5/2024.
Let’s hope this is the beginning to establishment nationwide.
It took me awhile to get around to digging into this story, but I finally got to it today and it fits perfectly here. One of the pre-election challenges in this story also has to do with the unconstitutionality of early voting.
2024 STEAL MO: Seven Missouri County Poll Challengers File Pre-Election Challenges on Election Law Violations
By Joe Hoft
26 Oct 2024
https://joehoft.com/2024-steal-mo-seven-missouri-county-poll-challengers-file-pre-election-challenges-on-election-law-violations/
“Missouri Revised Statutes § 115.105(2), the role of a poll challenger is to address perceived violations of election law.”
“Per Missouri law, the burden is now on the Election Directors and Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft to address these violations to the challengers’ satisfaction. If no corrections are made, Missouri will not be able to legally certify their election results.”
It seems some smart ladies in Missouri dug deep into the Missouri Constitution to figure out how to challenge the way elections are being handled where they are being handled unconstitutionally. This is something they found out they could do as County Poll Challengers. They hope to see this as a growing movement in Missouri, and also outside the state lines. The blueprint is there.
FYI, despite having alleged Republican majorities in Missouri, they went backwards since 2020 by adding early voting and somehow turned Missouri into a caucus state, which only a few were allowed to participate in due to extremely few caucus locations available in 2024.
Note: Of the seven counties listed, Clay, Clinton, Jackson and Platte counties are part of the Kansas City Metro area on the West side of the state. St. Charles county and St. Louis City are part of the St. Louis metro area on the east side of the state. Boone county covers Columbia, more center to the state, almost down to Jefferson City, MO, the Missouri Capitol shown in the photo. Columbia is also where the University of Missouri (MU) aka Mizzou is located.
This is another one to keep your eyes peeled on.
More here from the very smart lady poll challengers:
https://rumble.com/v5k2upp-the-robb-carter-show.html?start=5362
Devvy Kidd (News with Views) has been writing for years —Under federal law that election should have been declared void. Under that 1997 Supreme Court decision, , Trump was so far ahead of cheater China Joe by midnight ON ELECTION DAY, he should have been declared the winner. It’s too bad Trump’s million dollar an hour attorneys didn’t file immediately with the U.S. Supreme Court since it was their 1997, 9-0 decision.
Elections Undecided by Midnight are Void & Preempted by Federal Law – Foster v Love (1997; 9-0 Decision), Nov. 18, 2020 by Ren Vander, Esq.
“Federal Election statutes were designed to curtail fraud, and to infuse a prima facie sense of integrity in our electoral process. But these States – in failing to obey Congressional deadlines – have flagrantly attempted to preempt federal law. This is certainly prohibited, and this is why the late election results are void. If you haven’t read his legal analysis, do take the time.
Devvy Kidd continues—-All in violation of federal election laws. Foster v Love, 522 U.S. 67, 71-72 is a 9-0 decision back in 1997 by the U.S. Supreme Court. They agreed to take up the issue of federal statutes vs state’s regarding election for federal offices and state election dates. The case that started it: MURPHY J. FOSTER, Jr., GOVERNOR OF LOUISIANA, et al., PETITIONERS v. G. SCOTT LOVE, PAUL S. BERGERON, KATHLEEN B. BALHOFF, and BENNIE BAKER-BOURGEOIS.
It’s rare SCOTUS has a 9-0 decision and this one surprised me considering the late Ruth Bader Ginsberg was on the bench back then. You can read the transcript of the oral arguments in Foster v Love here.
Quoting Ginsberg: “It is an election, and it seems to me, being an election it conflicts with the Federal single Election Day.” It’s unfortunate this was not the key argument in Trump’s lawsuits although several of us tried to get him this information.
It is a clear, logical ruling. It should apply to all states.
Our founders intended that authority first lie in the citizens, then the States, then the Federal Government. No ballot received after Election Day should be counted.