The Supreme Court’s Conservatives Sure Are Pushing Some Crazy Legal Theories Lately
Slateseries is made possible by the support of Slate Plus members and readers like you. A Pennsylvania statute disqualifies ballots that come in after election night; the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, however, found that this rule violates the state constitution in light of the pandemic, combined with the Postal Service slowdown. In fact, the Supreme Court has long held that legislatures don’t hold sole authority to run elections; state courts can enforce election rules, and the legislature can delegate their powers—to a board of elections, for instance. As the court put it in 1984, “it is difficult to think of a greater intrusion on state sovereignty than when a federal court instructs state officials on how to conform their conduct to state law.” On Wednesday, the Supreme Court turned away Republicans’ request to shorten the deadline. And by accusing the board of creating an “unnecessary conflict” with state law, Gorsuch defied the state court’s conclusion that the board’s actions were reasonable: They did not conflict with the election code, but simply enforced it.