Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

Dear Common Dreams Readers:
Corporations and billionaires have their own media. Shouldn't we? When you “follow the money” that funds our independent journalism, it all leads back to this: people like you. Our supporters are what allows us to produce journalism in the public interest that is beholden only to people, our planet, and the common good. Please support our Mid-Year Campaign so that we always have a newsroom for the people that is funded by the people. Thank you for your support. --Jon Queally, managing editor

Join the small group of generous readers who donate, keeping Common Dreams free for millions of people each year. Without your help, we won’t survive.

A woman deposits her ballot in an official ballot drop box at the satellite polling station outside Philadelphia City Hall on October 27, 2020 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

A woman deposits her ballot in an official ballot drop box at the satellite polling station outside Philadelphia City Hall on October 27, 2020 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (Photo: Mark Makela/Getty Images)

'Drop It Off or Vote in Person,' Advocates Plea as Supreme Court Suggests It Could Toss Out Late Pennsylvania Ballots After Election

"Don't leave your vote in the hands of the Supreme Court."

Jake Johnson

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday handed down a pair of closely watched decisions allowing Pennsylvania and North Carolina to accept absentee ballots that arrive after Election Day, prompting a sigh of relief among voting rights advocates who were dreading the possibility of mass invalidation of late-arriving ballots.

But analysts were quick to warn the high court's decision in the Pennsylvania case left open the possibility that ballots arriving after November 3 could be tossed out by the Supreme Court at a later date—a move President Donald Trump has repeatedly made clear he would welcome.

"There's a chance, however slim, that those late-arriving ballots could decide the whole election. If SCOTUS throws them out and ends up handing Trump a second term, it would make Bush v. Gore look like a warm-up act."
—Mark Joseph Stern, Slate

Justice Samuel Alito, with the backing of fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, wrote in a statement (pdf) accompanying the Pennsylvania ruling that he "reluctantly" concluded "there is simply not enough time at this late date to decide the question before the election," leaving the court no choice but to reject state Republicans' request to block a lower court order allowing ballots to arrive by November 6.

"That does not mean, however, that the state court decision must escape our review," Alito added, pointing to Pennsylvania state officials' order that absentee ballots received after 8:00 pm on Election Day be segregated from ballots that arrived before then.

"If the State Supreme Court's decision is ultimately overturned," Alito wrote, "a targeted remedy will be available."

As HuffPost explained, "This means Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch are open to a legal challenge brought by President Donald Trump after Election Day that would invalidate votes cast legally in Pennsylvania after the votes are cast―when Trump and the justices would know how many votes he needs to have invalidated to win reelection. Gorsuch doesn't explicitly state his support for tossing ballots after the election in the North Carolina case, but it appears the same logic would apply because both cases raise the same legal question."

Mark Joseph Stern, court reporter for Slate, called Alito's statement "pretty frightening" and spotlighted the potential consequences of a post-election Supreme Court ruling invalidating ballots that arrived after November 3, even if they were postmarked on time and legally permitted under state law.

"Alito described this potential 'targeted remedy' as 'modest relief.' It would be anything but: This 'relief' would likely involve the U.S. Supreme Court nullifying thousands of ballots cast under a lawful court order," Stern wrote Wednesday. "It's hard to overstate the potential impact of such a dramatic action. FiveThirtyEight reports a 37.1 percent chance that the election will come down to Pennsylvania."

"If the race is close enough, the winner of Pennsylvania—and the presidency—might come down to a few thousand ballots," Stern continued. "There's a chance, however slim, that those late-arriving ballots, in other words, could decide the whole election. If SCOTUS throws them out and ends up handing Trump a second term, it would make Bush v. Gore look like a warm-up act."

In the wake of the high court's rulings in Pennsylvania and North Carolina—which newly confirmed Justice Amy Coney Barrett did not join due to time constraints—voting rights advocates and election experts reiterated their urgent calls for voters to drop off their ballots in person if possible to avoid getting caught up in persistent mail delays caused by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy.

Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, tweeted late Wednesday that "high voter turnout in PA with a decisive win will keep the Court out post-election."

"Most important for PA voters right now," said Gupta, "is to vote and drop off ballots as early as possible or vote in-person."


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Just a few days left in our crucial Mid-Year Campaign and we might not make it without your help.
Who funds our independent journalism? Readers like you who believe in our mission: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. No corporate advertisers. No billionaire founder. Our non-partisan, nonprofit media model has only one source of revenue: The people who read and value this work and our mission. That's it.
And the model is simple: If everyone just gives whatever amount they can afford and think is reasonable—$3, $9, $29, or more—we can continue. If not enough do, we go dark.

All the small gifts add up to something otherwise impossible. Please join us today. Donate to Common Dreams. This is crunch time. We need you now.

'Morally Bankrupt' G7 Slammed for 'Caving' to Fossil Fuel Lobby on Climate

"People in poverty around the world will pay the highest price for this backtrack by some of the wealthiest countries," one activist warned of the group's new statement on gas investments.

Jessica Corbett ·


'Yeah, And?': Ocasio-Cortez Embraces GOP Freakout Over Helping Women Skirt Abortion Bans

"Republicans are mad because I am sharing this information," said Rep. Ocasio-Cortez. "Too bad!"

Julia Conley ·


WATCH LIVE: Top Meadows Aide Cassidy Hutchinson Testifies at Surprise Jan. 6 Hearing

Hutchinson, who has spent more than 20 hours in deposition with the House panel, is expected to provide more damning evidence of the role that Meadows played in Trump's coup attempt.

Kenny Stancil ·


Oxfam Condemns G7 for Leaving 'Millions to Starve' as Global Hunger Surges

"Faced with the worst hunger crisis in a generation, the G7 have simply failed to take the action that is needed," said Max Lawson of Oxfam International.

Jake Johnson ·


'Horrific': 50 Migrants Found Dead in Abandoned Trailer Truck in Texas

"We need to end Title 42 and fix our broken immigration system so these unimaginable tragedies stop happening," said Rep. Chuy García. "People fleeing violence and poverty deserve a chance at a better life."

Jake Johnson ·

Common Dreams Logo