The two sides had recruited lawyers for the difficult task
The threat of litigation loomed over the historic election day
The vote this year caused a lot of controversy.
Reuters
picture
The US election day was marked, this time, by threats of legal challenges, while candidates and parties recruited prominent lawyers to seek their assistance in the event that litigation was an urgent necessity, if a narrow margin became in places where competition was raging.
Since the 2000 presidential election, during which the Supreme Court ultimately decided who won, both parties have enlisted legal teams to prepare for the unlikely event.
But this year, there is an almost certain assumption that legal battles will break out, and that only a decisive outcome is likely to prevent them.
President Donald Trump said two days ago that he had gone to court to prevent Pennsylvania from counting the votes by mail, which would be received in the three days following the election.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered the extension, while the Supreme Court left the order in effect in response to Republican efforts to block it.
Trump is unhappy with the decision, although Pennsylvania will keep these cards separate from the rest, in case interest in litigation renews.
Trump spent most of his last days campaigning against the resolution, often using imprecise descriptions, noting that the court’s decision allows for “widespread and unmonitored fraud” as well as undermining the law, including street violence, and there is no evidence to support this view.
Trump added that once the polls ended, "we will act with our attorneys."
Regardless of what the president said, it is not clear what other issues may arise when voters cast their ballots, especially since early voting numbers have already exceeded the figures for 2016. About 300 lawsuits have already been filed, regarding elections in dozens of states across all regions. The country, many of which included changes in normal procedures, due to the Corona pandemic, which killed more than 230,000 people, in the United States, and infected more than nine million.
Legal battles broke out over signature mechanisms, ballot boxes, and secret envelopes.
Like Pennsylvania, North Carolina has also seen a court battle between Democrats who support an extension of the absentee ballot deadline and Republicans who oppose it.
The state court approved the six-day extension.
In Minnesota, late ballot papers will also be separated from the rest of the vote, due to ongoing legal proceedings, under a federal appeals court order, and Republican lawsuits have challenged local decisions that may gain national importance in close elections.
And in Texas, Republicans have asked state and federal courts to order election officials, in the Houston area, not to count the votes delivered.
On Sunday, the Texas Supreme Court rejected the Republican petition.
On Monday, a federal judge also rejected an attempt to nullify some 127,000 votes, and an appeal is planned.
And in Nevada, a state court judge rejected an attempt by the Trump campaign and state Republicans to stop mail counting in Las Vegas, the most populous and Democratic-leaning district, despite an appeal to the state's Supreme Court.
Most of the potential legal challenges are likely to come from the massive increase in postal polling, due to the pandemic.
And in Pennsylvania, election officials will not begin processing these votes until Election Day, and some counties have said they will not begin counting those votes until the day after the election.
Mailed ballots that do not come in a secret envelope must also be disposed of by judgment of the state's Supreme Court.
Local constitutions
In general, the Supreme Court does not question the decisions of state courts when it relies on their local constitutions, but Democrats are alarmed by Judge Brett Kavanaugh's reference to the 2000 court ruling regarding George Bush and Al Gore's disagreement regarding electoral votes, which decided that the elections Presidential favor to Bush.
Although it was not the majority opinion in that case, three conservative judges ruled in Bush’s favor in 2000 because the Florida Supreme Court's vote recount warrant encroached on the legislature’s authority.
Kavanaugh is one of three justices who worked on the Florida dispute 20 years ago, while Chief Justice John Roberts and the new Supreme Court judge, Amy Connie Barrett, were the other two.
Most of the potential legal challenges are likely to come from the massive increase in postal voting, due to the pandemic.
Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news