The Pennsylvania State Department has handed the Trump campaign a major win. As the election is less than a week away record amounts of absentee and mail-in ballots are flooding polling places. Recently, guidelines were released advising polling places how to handle ballots received after polling places close at 8 p.m. on Election Day.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that polling places will be given a three-day extension to count ballots postmarked on or before Election Day by Friday, Nov. 6 at 5 p.m. The Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee are challenging the ruling with hopes the Supreme Court will rule in their favor. Because a final ruling has not been given the Pennsylvania Department of State has told polling places to separate ballots received before 8 p.m. on Nov. 3 and the ballots received after 8 p.m. and before the cut-off date.
In a report from Townhall:
County boards of elections are not to tally those ballots received between the time that polls close and the end of the three-day extension window. They are, however, to keep a log with the voter’s name, address, date of delivery, whether the ballot’s envelope has a legible postmark and the postmark’s date.
“The Department of State will promptly update the county boards of elections on how to pre-canvass and canvass the segregated ballots and of further developments related to the Court-ordered extension. County boards should remain alert for further direction regarding the ballots subject to the Supreme Court’s decision,” the guidance document concluded.
The Trump campaign celebrated the decision, calling it a “victory.”
“President Trump secured a big victory when the Pennsylvania Secretary of State saw the writing on the wall and voluntarily complied with our injunction request, segregating ballots received after the legislature’s November 3 deadline to ensure they will not be counted until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on our petition,” Justin Clark, Deputy Campaign Manager and Senior Counsel, said in a statement. “The Supreme Court deferred the important issue in this case—whether state courts can change the times, places, and manners of elections contrary to the rules adopted by the state legislature—until after November 3.”
