The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled on Friday that mail-in ballots missing dates or with incorrect dates will not be counted in the upcoming election, affirming a previous position that has sparked controversy.
This 3-2 ruling responds to an emergency appeal filed by the Republican National Committee, which aimed to prevent lower court rulings that would allow such ballots, citing them as a violation of state law.
The case involved 69 undated or misdated ballots from a recent September special election, which Republicans highlighted as a potential source of dispute leading up to the presidential election, where Pennsylvania’s results could be critical.
Although these ballots did not affect the outcome of that election, the GOP argued that the ruling sets a precedent that could leave thousands of ballots at risk in the battleground state.
In its decision, the Supreme Court stated that the lower court’s ruling “shall not be applied to the November 5, 2024 General Election.”
Justice Kevin Dougherty, in a concurring opinion, criticized the lower court for what he called unnecessary deviation from established rules, emphasizing the importance of upholding election procedures consistently.
Dougherty warned lower courts to “think twice — maybe even three times — before granting relief that could arguably be construed as imposing ‘substantial alterations to existing laws and procedures during the pendency of an ongoing election.’”
However, Justice Christine Donohue, supported by Chief Justice Debra Todd, pushed back against Dougherty’s remarks.
She argued that it was unwarranted to chastise both voters and lower courts for navigating the complexities of election law, noting that “the recurring nature of election cycles” makes these challenges almost inevitable.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, with a Democratic majority, upheld a status quo that aligns with past rulings requiring correct dates on mail-in ballots.
Republicans contend that the dating requirement is essential for ballot integrity, while the Democratic National Committee and Pennsylvania’s Republican secretary of state argue that ballots are time-stamped on receipt, rendering the date field redundant.
The decision leaves the door open for further legal disputes, as the DNC and two voters who brought the lawsuit had urged the court to address the constitutionality of disqualifying ballots with date errors definitively.
Instead, the justices deferred, which means the matter could resurface in post-election litigation. As it stands, the ruling reinforces Pennsylvania’s current approach to ballot handling but underscores that further legal battles could be on the horizon in this key state.