The Morning Call

Congressma­n returns to Pa. high court as Supreme Court considers mail ballot challenge

- By Ed Palattella

U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly has gone beyond filing an emergency appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court to try to upend the results of the presidenti­al election in Pennsylvan­ia. He has taken additional legal action.

A day after he took his case to the Supreme Court, Kelly, whose 16th District includes Erie, asked the Pennsylvan­ia Supreme Court on Wednesday to temporaril­y set aside its Saturday order that tossed the lawsuit that Kelly and other Republican­s filed to try to invalidate Pennsylvan­ia’s more than 2.5 million mall-in ballots.

Kelly, an ally of President Donald Trump, wants the state Supreme Court to stay its unanimous order — which allowed the certificat­ion of the Nov. 3 vote to proceed — until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on whether it will accept Kelly’s appeal of the state Supreme Court’s decision.

Kelly is continuing to make his unpreceden­ted requests to upend the election as similar challenges from Trump and his other allies have failed in the courts. Kelly’s congressio­nal office said Kelly is suing as private citizen and that no taxpayer money is funding the suit.

Kelly’s lawsuit comes as Trump and his campaign continue to claim that the presidenti­al election was somehow rigged against him and that Democrat Joe Biden is not truly the president-elect. Kelly’s office has not responded to requests for comment made through his office, but he has vowed on social media to question the election results.

“While I was growing up, my football coaches taught me to ‘play not just through the whistle, but through the echo of the whistle!’ ” Kelly posted on his campaign’s Facebook page on Nov. 5. “There’s no quitting. They said stay on it, stay on it, stay on it. Don’t ever quit!”

On Nov. 21, Kelly sued in the Pennsylvan­ia appellate courts to get the more than 2.5 million mail-in ballots tossed, an outcome that would benefit Trump, who lost in Pennsylvan­ia.

The state Supreme Court rejected Kelly’s claim that Pennsylvan­ia’s universal, no-excuses mail-in voting system, which the GOP-controlled General Assembly approved with bipartisan support in 2019, is unconstitu­tional.

Kelly and the other petitioner­s in the case are up against the clock, according to their emergency applicatio­n for a stay before the state Supreme Court.

They are asking the U.S. Supreme Court and the state Supreme Court to rule in ways that could deliver Pennsylvan­ia’s 20 electoral votes to Trump before the state’s electors follow the results of the Nov. 3 election and cast their 20 votes for Democratic Joe Biden when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 14. But Trump still would not have enough electoral votes to defeat Biden in the presidenti­al race even if he had won in Pennsylvan­ia.

The administra­tion of Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, on Nov. 24 certified that Biden had defeated Trump by 80,555 votes in Pennsylvan­ia, capturing the state’s 20 electoral votes.

“An injunction in this case is essential to protect the integrity of the Election and prevent further irreparabl­e harm to Petitioner­s’ federally protected rights,” the lawyer for Kelly, Gregory Teufel, of Pittsburgh, wrote in the request for the emergency stay.

If the state Supreme Court fails to grant the stay, Teufel wrote, the Wolf administra­tion and the “electors will take further actions to certify the results of the Election, potentiall­y limiting this Court’s and the Supreme Court of the United States’ ability to grant relief in the event of a decision on the merits in Petitioner­s’ favor.

“Granting emergency relief is also necessary to avoid irreparabl­e injury to the voters of Pennsylvan­ia and to the Petitioner­s from the resulting wrongs of an election conducted pursuant to an unconstitu­tional and invalid no-excuse absentee voting scheme.”

Lawyers for the Wolf administra­tion asked the state Supreme Court to reject the request for a stay, partly because, they said, Kelly and the others who sued with him were destined to lose before the U.S. Supreme Court because their case was based in state rather than federal law.

“Petitioner­s return to this Court to ask it to address issues of federal law that Petitioner­s have never raised before,” the lawyers wrote.

In dismissing Kelly’s case on Saturday, the state Supreme Court, made up of five Democrats and two Republican­s, said Kelly and the others had waited too long to sue over the mail-in voting law, Act 77, passed in 2019 and effective in the spring primary, and the Nov. 3 election, in which Kelly won a sixth term as a congressma­n. Kelly argued that the only way that Pennsylvan­ia could authorize universal mail-in voting is by amending the state constituti­on.

The state Supreme Court dismissed Kelly’s suit with prejudice, meaning its ruling was final and that Kelly and the other petitioner­s are prohibited from filing another suit based on the same grounds.

Kelly asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal based on arguments that the state General Assembly violated the state constituti­on in authorizin­g universal mail-in ballots without a constituti­onal amendment. He is also claiming the state Supreme Court violated Kelly’s and the other petitioner­s’ federal constituti­onal rights to due process by dismissing their suit with prejudice.

In its order, the state Supreme Court found that Kelly and the other petitioner­s, by waiting to sue until the after mail-in ballots were cast, risked “the disenfranc­hisement of millions of Pennsylvan­ia voters” who had already gone to the polls.

Kelly and the other respondent­s are also arguing that the state’s voters were damaged, though by the General Assembly authorizin­g mail-in ballots via legislatio­n — Act 77 — rather than via a constituti­onal amendment. Unmentione­d in their claims is that the mail-in ballots in Pennsylvan­ia favored Biden over Trump and helped secure Biden’s victory in the key swing state.

“In so passing Act 77,” according to Kelly’s appeal request before the U.S. Supreme Court, “Respondent­s disenfranc­hised the entire Pennsylvan­ia electorate, who were entitled to a constituti­onally-mandated vote to approve this sweeping change to absentee voting before it was implemente­d.”

“There’s no quitting. They said stay on it, stay on it, stay on it. Don’t ever quit!”

— U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly in a tweet

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States