Liberal Media PANICS As SCOTUS PREPARES TO TAKE SLEDGE HAMMER To MAJOR Democrat Election LOOPHOLE!

The Supreme Court heard arguments in a case led by the RNC to block mail-in votes received after Election Day, even if legally cast and postmarked on time. This could disenfranchise voters in over a dozen states, including elderly, disabled, Native American, and Black voters.

The RNC-led effort would essentially block any votes by mail received after election day, even if they were legally cast and postmarked on time. It could potentially disenfranchise voters in more than a dozen states, including elderly and disabled voters, Native Americans, and black voters.

A central argument is that 'Election Day' (the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November) should mean ballots must be *received* by election officials on that day, not merely postmarked. This challenges state laws that allow grace periods for mail-in ballots.

If election day must be what it was in 1845, that takes out much more than the ballot receipt laws of 30 states today. It dooms absentee voting, modern methods of voting, the secret ballot, and more. ...federal law prescribes election day as being the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. And as a result, Mississippi and other states are not at liberty to grant a grace period for mail-in votes.

The host and those supporting the RNC's position argue that allowing ballots to trickle in after Election Day, especially without strict postmark requirements or if post offices are open after polls close, creates opportunities for fraud and undermines public confidence in election results.

The possibility that there's a 4-hour window where people could go get their ballots, absentee ballots, postmarked after all of the returns are in and they know that, oh, this is the election where these things could turn the result. That does not seem entirely possible. ...it just opens up the door for all types of fraud, all types of confusion. It really undermines the election process, right? It undermines faith in our elections.

Despite concerns about military and overseas voters, a special federal statute (UACAVA) exists to protect their ability to cast ballots, meaning a ruling on general mail-in ballots would not preempt these specific provisions.

For those of you who are concerned about whether this would impact our military abroad being able to cast their ballots, it doesn't because there's a special statute for that under federal law. So there's no preemption issue.