Voter suppresion/"stealing the election" megathread

[Skill and Chance]

So far, the SCOTUS majority (Roberts and Kavanaugh) position is consistently "leave what the state decided to do in place."  With this in mind,  I expect Pennsylvania Democrats and Wisconsin Republicans to win their cases based on leaving the state law as-is.

[Skill and Chance]

So far, the SCOTUS majority (Roberts and Kavanaugh) position is consistently "leave what the state decided to do in place."  With this in mind,  I expect Pennsylvania Democrats and Wisconsin Republicans to win their cases based on leaving the state law as-is.

Montana seems like an exception, but it sounds like it was because they were going to mail out the ballots tomorrow.

No, expanding mail in voting is what the election authorities in Montana originally wanted to do.  They did it without explicit legislative approval using leeway an existing law gave.  This is fairly similar to the  PA case where the courts and statewide officials unilaterally made changes this year. 

[Skill and Chance]

For reference, since SCOTUS is leaning heavily on a "don't question the states" policy, here is a map of swing states and competitive senate seat states by partisanship of the governor and secretary of state or other institution that regulates election procedures:

Split states:

AZ: R Gov/D SoS
NH: R Gov/D SoS
NV: D Gov/R SoS


And here is a map of state supreme courts by party if elected or by partisanship of appointing governor/legislature if appointed, dark shading = strong majority, light shading = 1 seat majority:

Notes:

AZ: appointed, 7/0 R, Ducey and legislative R's packed the court in 2016
CO: appointed, 6D/1R
FL: appointed, 7R/0D, but one of the Crist appointees is clearly liberal so in practice it's 6R/1D
GA: appointed, 9/0 R, Deal and legislative R's packed the court in 2017
IA: appointed, 6R/1D
ME: appointed, 6D/1R
MI: elected, officially 4R/3D, 2 of the R's are known for being moderate, voted 4/3 in favor of the R position in a recent 2020 election case, but voted 4/3 in favor of the D position on the nonpartisan redistricting initiative back in 2018 when the court was 5R/2D (one R seat flipped in 2018)
MN: appointed, 5D/2R
NC: elected, 6D/1R
NE: appointed, 6R/1D
NH: appointed, is split 2/2 between R appointees and D appointees with the 5th seat vacant
NV: elected, court is officially nonpartisan, but analysts consider it liberal and it unanimously refused to block universal VBM when the Trump campaign appealed
OH: elected, 5R/2D, fairly moderate
PA: elected, 5D/2R, consistently supports the D position on any election issues
TX: elected, 9/0 R
WI: elected, for all practical purposes it's 4R/3D, one R is notably moderate and there was a recent 2020 election case that was decided 4/3 in favor of the D position
VA: appointed, system is complicated, but it's clear that Dems had a say in appointing 3 of the 7 justices and no say in appointing the other 4

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1314318053883211778

Deplorable authoritarians.

And with that, Trump keeps Wisconsin.

Exactly nothing has changed in Wisconsin. Wisconsin always counts votes up until the polls close and nothing received afterward.

You guys are shrieking for no reason. Biden's campaign will plan around what has been the norm for years.

This.  Simply maintaining the rule that was already on the books does nothing to help or hurt either campaign.  If they end up overturning the PA Supreme Court on mail voting, that would be a different story.  Simply leaving the status quo in place is not a conspiracy.

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1314750877442412544

Very very nice. Let's see how long it lasts.

This one has a decent chance of surviving at the appeals level, because it was Abbott who ordered a change to procedures < 1 month before the election, and the federal court is merely restoring the status quo.

[Skill and Chance]

Weird that we still haven't heard from SCOTUS on the PA case.

[Skill and Chance]

Ca. 30 million mail ballots that were requested were not returned as of yesterday, the last day the Post said voters should return them to be counted.

Democrats have a 3 million lead among those unreturned ballots.

Looks like a lot of wasted votes if they come in on Wednesday in several states, such as WI.

Imagine if this results in Biden narrowly losing the popular vote and winning the electoral college lol

Or a SCOTUS intervention in a post-election suit by an R congressional candidate in CA that results in like 2 million CA mail votes being invalidated?

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/rtmradio/status/1326660188968022016?s=21

It looks like James Lankford is another Republican to add to the relatively small list of ones who accept a Biden victory.

A non-retiring incumbent in Oklahoma?  The dam is breaking. 

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/nancykaffer/status/1328834950456553479?s=20

The board is deadlocked 2-2. The (Republican, obviously) chair said she’d consider certifying the results in areas besides Detroit. So brazen.

What is the endgame here?  What does this decision do and who can it be appealed to?

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/nancykaffer/status/1328834950456553479?s=20
The board is deadlocked 2-2. The (Republican, obviously) chair said she’d consider certifying the results in areas besides Detroit. So brazen.

What is the endgame here?  What does this decision do and who can it be appealed to?

All it can do is delay the county's certification by a few days.  If they don't certify by their deadline, the state bureau of elections will take over and certify the county's results.

Don't Democratic and Republican members have to agree to certify at the state level?  What if the Republican members refuse there, too?

[Skill and Chance]

I guessed they changed their mind?

https://twitter.com/adam_brew/status/1328882544348180483

Back from the brink. 

Michigan (pending lawsuits) and Georgia are the only states where Republicans can unilaterally deny certification under existing state law.  Fortunately, SOS Raffensperger certifies in Georgia and he is clearly on team reality, so Michigan is the last real risk.

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1329525481595674625

Pennsylvania legislators already said they wouldn't do this. I'm most concerned about Michigan here.

Really the biggest risks would be AZ and GA because there's no Democratic governor to veto, but Raffensperger certifies in Georgia and is clearly not into this and the AZ SOS who certifies is a Dem.  In PA, the Dem governor certifies.  Even if Michigan denies certification, it doesn't work out in the EC. 

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1329525481595674625

Pennsylvania legislators already said they wouldn't do this. I'm most concerned about Michigan here.

Really the biggest risks would be AZ and GA because there's no Democratic governor to veto, but Raffensperger certifies in Georgia and is clearly not into this and the AZ SOS who certifies is a Dem.  In PA, the Dem governor certifies.  Even if Michigan denies certification, it doesn't work out in the EC. 

I do not think the worry should be certifications at the moment. My question for everybody is, for example, if the AZ and GA legislatures would pass a Trump-slate of electors, and if their governors do not object, what that throw those states into Trump's column. I apologize if I sound stupid, but with the MI situation, I was told that even if the state legislature would appoint Trump-electors, Gov. Whitmer could put Biden-electors in the EC and they would take preference.

If certification happens, there will be Biden electors showing up to the EC meeting for that state, and they would take precedence over any state legislative appointed electors under the Electoral Count Act as they are based on the popular vote in the state.  So worst case scenario is 2 slates of electors if they certify.  There is language about what happens if the election "fails" in the Electoral Count Act that could potentially give more leeway to the legislature if a state never certifies, hence the focus on Michigan. 

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1329525481595674625

Pennsylvania legislators already said they wouldn't do this. I'm most concerned about Michigan here.

Really the biggest risks would be AZ and GA because there's no Democratic governor to veto, but Raffensperger certifies in Georgia and is clearly not into this and the AZ SOS who certifies is a Dem.  In PA, the Dem governor certifies.  Even if Michigan denies certification, it doesn't work out in the EC. 

Not worried about Michigan, Whitmer has the authority to take folks off the election board and replace them (say with a Republican who has endorsed Joe Biden like a former Governor).

Michigan is where the backdoor legislative thing is closest to happening though.

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/1329629701447573504

Thank you Romney for being a sane person!

Indeed. Romney has proven that he is an honorable Republican.

It actually could be important that Romney made this statement in the situation where MI/WI/PA submit competing slates of electors. When the electoral votes are counted on Jan. 6, if both the House and Senate can agree on which electors are valid, then those are counted. Dems have 48 Senators in the next Senate. Romney is 49. I'm not sure how the Georgia seats work in this calculation with the runoff elections happening the previous day, let's assume Loeffler is still sitting and Purdue's seat is vacant. Then Dems need just one more senator, probably Collins or Murkowski, to side with them, and this would basically guarantee that the "state legislature coup" would fail.

I think there's a small chance Collins is salty after Democrats spent so much money against her, but I have a hard time seeing Lisa Murkowski not voting with the Democrats in this case, especially if American Democracy is at stake.

In the best Dem case for the GA runoffs, Romney is enough by himself, even split and Romney and Sasse are enough, worst case (double loss with immediate seating) they need one more vote, probably Murkowsi.

[Skill and Chance]

You know your argument is crap when even the Wisconsin State Supreme Court won't hear your case.

https://twitter.com/sbauerAP/status/1334558426274390020?s=20

https://twitter.com/sbauerAP/status/1334562034323779585?s=20

This court basically has 3 Justice Alitos, 3 Justice Sotomayors and one Justice Roberts.  The election in April that flipped a seat R->D was almost surely decisive for the outcome of this case.

[Skill and Chance]

Is this new lawsuit that's just been filed in the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court worthy of concern at all, if, say, one of the wingnuts on it orders decertification at 11:50 pm tomorrow?

No, but that would potentially be a concern in AZ or GA where the state supreme courts are very rightwing.

[Skill and Chance]

So that's Sasse, Capito, Toomey, and now Murkowski who've explicitly said they'll affirm the results, in addition to fairly obvious votes to affirm in Romney, Collins, and the top leadership (Mitch and Thune), and probably plenty more votes to affirm who haven't made their intentions known just yet. Am I missing anyone?

This still sounds it's going to be at least 20-some senators voting in favor, which would make it the most controversial at this stage since 1876.

[Skill and Chance]

What are the odds that any Dem-controlled chamber of congress votes to throw out the next EV/PV split now?  95%?  In any plausible scenario, they can flip the outcome simply by rejecting the electors from Texas and Florida if they control both chambers.  No need to ever invoke the 12th Amendment vote-by-state scenario because the Dem will have a majority of what is left.  

*In the case of split control of congress, there are all kinds of legal technicalities in a one house votes to reject, one house votes to accept scenario.  It could lead to the Democratic candidate, the Republican candidate, or the Speaker of the House becoming president. In the latter case, the WH could even flip in the midterm election.

[Skill and Chance]

Pence is a coward

https://twitter.com/rollcall/status/1346473050078777356?s=20

This is good. 

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1363859286066040838

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1363866236224823296

For some closure.

Kavanaugh and Barrett both declining to hear the case has very important implications for the stability of election law over the next 4 years, especially after Kavanuagh flirted with it in October.  I don't think we need to worry about an explicit overturning of the Arizona redistricting commission case anymore as this is in all likelihood the most conservative SCOTUS will be for decades to come.