That's right Republicans, bring it all the way to the Supreme Court.

That'll be a great reminder to people why they should vote for President.

Thx!

based on state law, it's done.

Can't appeal directly to USSC, have to start from the scratch.

Remember Florida? Everything was followed according to Florida law, and FSC had it right the first time, but was overturned illegally by the U.S. Supreme Court.

they found a federal rationale to overturn the florida supreme court.

one of several things that was preposterous was that they said the recount violated equal treatment (due to inconsistent recount rules from county to county), and used this as a basis to uphold an election that itself violated equal treatment (due to inconsistent counting rules from county to county).

but i don't think you can say that the supreme court has no basis at all for hearing and ruling on voting rights cases, or on election and voting laws.

This is the state SC. What are they going to argue?

Searching

How many attempts is that?

So PA is now Obama country, and the focus of downtickets should be significant enough to remove any Republicans from Congress.

at the polls - and then, to try somehow to ensure all the votes are counted.
I understand there are discrepancies between electronic counts and hand counts in Wisconsin.
Living in Florida, I fully expect the very worst from the GOP when it comes to tossing Dem votes in any way they can.

but the last tweet says "tornado watch".

groan.

hopefully even if an appeal is planned it's too late for 2012, so the election is somewhat more secure?

etc. They have a vast playbook of opportunities, once you let the Repubs count the votes. In way too many states, the Exec in charge of voting and certifying votes are Repub operatives. It's completely legal, apparently, and they have BROAD discretion. The Pennsylvania guy lost this battle, but he is not done. And they do things that are illegal, too, counting on protests to get hung up in red tape, like in Wisconsin, where thousands of votes were found in opened dufflebags in vacant lots. They dare us to arrest them, knowing we can't.

The Commonwealth court refused to grant an injunction pending the constitutionality case and allowed the law to continue. The State SC vacTed the lower court decision and am wondering if this means an injunction is in place pending review at the lower cort? Not clear yet where it goes since there is an appeals court that exists that this appeal bypassed.

There was no injunction issued. The case was remanded back to the lower court to assess whether the state could issue the voter ID required by law in time to ensure access to voters. The lower court must issue its deciaion by Oct. 2.

Two of the more liberal justices, Todd and McCaffery dissented. This is not good news.

<snip>

Overall, we are confronted with an ambitious effort on the part of the General
Assembly to bring the new identification procedure into effect within a relatively short
timeframe and an implementation process which has by no means been seamless in
light of the serious operational constraints faced by the executive branch. Given this
state of affairs, we are not satisfied with a mere predictive judgment based primarily on
the assurances of government officials, even though we have no doubt they are
proceeding in good faith.

Thus, we will return the matter to the Commonwealth Court to make a present
assessment of the actual availability of the alternate identification cards on a developed
record in light of the experience since the time the cards became available. In this
regard, the court is to consider whether the procedures being used for deployment of
the cards comport with the requirement of liberal access which the General Assembly
attached to the issuance of PennDOT identification cards. If they do not, or if the

Commonwealth Court is not still convinced in its predictive judgment that there will be
no voter disenfranchisement arising out of the Commonwealth’s implementation of a
voter identification requirement for purposes of the upcoming election, that court is
obliged to enter a preliminary injunction.
Accordingly, the order of the Commonwealth Court is VACATED, and the matter
is returned to the Commonwealth Court for further proceedings consistent with this
Order. The Commonwealth Court is to file its supplemental opinion on or before
October 2, 2012. Any further appeals will be administered on an expedited basis.
Jurisdiction is relinquished.

Madame Justice Todd files a Dissenting Statement which Mr. Justice McCaffery
joins.

Mr. Justice McCaffery files a Dissenting Statement which Madame Justice Todd
joins.

http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Supreme/out/J-114-2012pco.pdf