A far-right Fifth Circuit panel held on Friday that Mississippi's law is preempted by federal law. It did not appear that the ruling would apply to this year’s election.
Fascism, begins with the courts and if need be ends with the courts to usurp power and destroy democracies. By your expert interpretation of today's Appeals court ruling laying the groundwork for 2024 citation contesting 2024 federal election results, the proverbial cat is out of the bag. For-warned is for-armed. Thank you for all you do to protect our judicial system by shining a light for your readers to see. We are in this together.
Sometimes I wonder whether we should say: Okay, just secede already. With the proviso that people of color can move to another state freely and without penalty. Florida and Texas, Kacsmaryk and the Fifth Circuit—see ya, enjoy the Nineteenth Century … again. Don’t let Reality smite you in the ass on your way out.
This is why it's so important not to call SCOTUS rulings that one merely sees as deeply wrong/mistaken illegitimate. Whatever one thinks about rulings like Dobbs or even Heller they are different in kind than this ruling.
I admit it was clever to cite the mail interception service to show mailed ballots aren't final but it's far from clear that the Mississippi ballots have the necessary barcode allowing the sender to request interception and it ignores that I don't think any of this has the force of law (not sure it's illegal for USPS to let you intecept mail you sent from overseas).
Indeed. The feds control the postal service and therefore have additional powers that they can justify for themselves, when the “right” operatives are in place.
Hi Chris! Just a very tiny correction -- thanks as always for the text! -- UOCAVA refers to "UniformED and Overseas voters -- that is, in the military. It's not a "uniform" act but rather relates to uniformed services (as well as civilian voters abroad). 🙂
I don't think "...this is a problem that the panel is setting up to be resolved for future elections." This is a permission slip for reactionaries all over the country to challenge the validity of ballots everywhere, either right now, or just after the election. Of course those arguments won't fly in other circuits, but then we will have a circuit split that is bound to land at SCOTUS post haste.
I'm not sure that it matters, but Judge Oldham's claim that "[t]he postal service permits voters to recall mail" is highly misleading, at best. The service he is referring to, Package Intercept, allows senders to intercept *packages* and other items with tracking numbers, which ballot return envelopes obviously do not have. Even if a ballot was 'recalled', any "change[d] votes after Election Day" would be postmarked with the new mailing date, so the law at issue here wouldn't even apply.
I’m aalso struck at yet another citation of Bush v Gore when that decision stayed explicitly that it wasn’t intended “for the ages”. Kavanaugh opened another floodgate as soon as he was given the opportunity & all these neo-fascist-conservative-theocracy lovers are having a *blast*!!
I don't know how much more of this horseshit I can take. (Sorry for language.)
Chris,
Fascism, begins with the courts and if need be ends with the courts to usurp power and destroy democracies. By your expert interpretation of today's Appeals court ruling laying the groundwork for 2024 citation contesting 2024 federal election results, the proverbial cat is out of the bag. For-warned is for-armed. Thank you for all you do to protect our judicial system by shining a light for your readers to see. We are in this together.
Sometimes I wonder whether we should say: Okay, just secede already. With the proviso that people of color can move to another state freely and without penalty. Florida and Texas, Kacsmaryk and the Fifth Circuit—see ya, enjoy the Nineteenth Century … again. Don’t let Reality smite you in the ass on your way out.
I agree with you; the Union might not survive over time.
It is somewhat strange to see the Libertarian Party get involved here.
What are the odds of en banc rehearing?
This is why it's so important not to call SCOTUS rulings that one merely sees as deeply wrong/mistaken illegitimate. Whatever one thinks about rulings like Dobbs or even Heller they are different in kind than this ruling.
I admit it was clever to cite the mail interception service to show mailed ballots aren't final but it's far from clear that the Mississippi ballots have the necessary barcode allowing the sender to request interception and it ignores that I don't think any of this has the force of law (not sure it's illegal for USPS to let you intecept mail you sent from overseas).
Indeed. The feds control the postal service and therefore have additional powers that they can justify for themselves, when the “right” operatives are in place.
Another law that needs
definite cleaning up so the
5th circuit has no room to
play hide and seek.
Thank you Chris.
Hi Chris! Just a very tiny correction -- thanks as always for the text! -- UOCAVA refers to "UniformED and Overseas voters -- that is, in the military. It's not a "uniform" act but rather relates to uniformed services (as well as civilian voters abroad). 🙂
I don't think "...this is a problem that the panel is setting up to be resolved for future elections." This is a permission slip for reactionaries all over the country to challenge the validity of ballots everywhere, either right now, or just after the election. Of course those arguments won't fly in other circuits, but then we will have a circuit split that is bound to land at SCOTUS post haste.
And then what?
I'm not sure that it matters, but Judge Oldham's claim that "[t]he postal service permits voters to recall mail" is highly misleading, at best. The service he is referring to, Package Intercept, allows senders to intercept *packages* and other items with tracking numbers, which ballot return envelopes obviously do not have. Even if a ballot was 'recalled', any "change[d] votes after Election Day" would be postmarked with the new mailing date, so the law at issue here wouldn't even apply.
I’m aalso struck at yet another citation of Bush v Gore when that decision stayed explicitly that it wasn’t intended “for the ages”. Kavanaugh opened another floodgate as soon as he was given the opportunity & all these neo-fascist-conservative-theocracy lovers are having a *blast*!!