There’s still a little back-and-forth with undated mail-in ballots in PA 

March 28 – With the November election fast approaching, a lot of people are hoping Pennsylvania can finally figure out what the rule is on mail-in ballots. 

A US Federal Court of Appeals yesterday overturned a previous ruling by the PA Supreme Court that said undated ballots should be counted. 

The three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said no in their 2-1 decision. If a ballot does not have a date or has an incorrect date, it should not be counted.  

PA Representative Rob Kauffman said, “Which is important for the integrity process for mail-in ballots.” 

Pat Ryan of NewsTalk 103.7FM said, “I like the fact that there’s people that are verifying the signature.” 

Kauffman said, “November 2024 is a big deal. Now they’re essentially bringing back the law, which would require dated, signature verified ballots, whenever you do a mail-in ballot. So it’s actually giving a little win for election integrity, which was already in the law, but of course attempted to be struck down by the courts.”

Michele Jansen of NewsTalk 103.7FM said, “It almost feels like they arbitrarily just decided no that doesn’t matter but the problem is, the legislature sets the laws for voting and you can’t just arbitrarily get rid of part of it because you think it’s frivolous.”

So now proper dating is back to being required, but could it be appealed? 

Kauffman said, “Ideally, they could attempt to appeal it to the US Supreme Court, but this ruling would stand unless there’s a stay of some sort or the US decides to take up the case when very frankly, they may not take the case up and let the ruling stand.” 

Ryan said, “Given all the information and all the polling that says yeah, we want voter ID. Yes, we do want voter ID. The mass public outcry is yeah, that’s a good idea. Yeah, I’ve got to get a library card. I’ve got to go banking. I’ve got to get on an airplane. It might be a good idea that we’re deciding the fate of the United States of America to have a little voter ID.” 

Kauffman said, “The ruling is seemingly common-sensical. Actually, I believe the three judge panel that ruled this way were Democrat appointed judges. So I had to read that a few times to make sure that I was reading the story correctly.”