Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

unblock

(55,738 posts)

4. So apparently there was a law that required nail-in voters to add the date to the outer envelope

Reply to MarineCombatEngineer (Reply #2)

Fri Oct 24, 2025, 01:34 PM

Friday

And of course republicans seized on this to disqualify undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes even if they were legal otherwise.

Apparently they didn't even notify voters or give them an opportunity to fix it.

The 3rd circuit majority upheld the decision that this requirement was unconstitutional, Bove dissented, wanting to keep any stupid excuse to disqualify votes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

MarineCombatEngineer

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

JUST IN: Judge Emil Bove's dissent to 3rd Cir denying en banc in case striking PA mail-in ballot dating rule. [View all] In It to Win It Friday OP

Is this his first opinion? He's already earning his pay. NT mahatmakanejeeves Friday #1

For those of us that are legalese challenged, MarineCombatEngineer Friday #2

So apparently there was a law that required nail-in voters to add the date to the outer envelope unblock Friday #4

Thanks for that explanation. MarineCombatEngineer Friday #5

Asshole crud Friday #3