Hawley's argument is: starting in 1937, Pennsylvania has repeatedly violated its state constitution—including with an October 2019 bill supported by 132 out of 137 Republican state legislators that not one person claimed was unconstitutional until after Biden won.
Seriously.
/1
Seriously.
/1
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1349790685768130562
PA Constitution, Article VII: legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/…
§ 4, from 1901, says voting "methods" other than ballot are as "prescribed by law," i.e. legislature can alter. § 14 says what absentee ballots must be allowed. They've expanded that a couple times, 1957, 1967, 1985, 1997.
/2
§ 4, from 1901, says voting "methods" other than ballot are as "prescribed by law," i.e. legislature can alter. § 14 says what absentee ballots must be allowed. They've expanded that a couple times, 1957, 1967, 1985, 1997.
/2
Beginning in 1937, the Pennsylvania has had its own qualifications for absentee ballots, broadening eligibility beyond Art VII, § 14 of the PA Constitution. This, too, has been amended a bunch of times: 1963, 1968, 1980, 1998, 2006, 2012.
/3 legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/L…
/3 legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/L…
In October 2019, pre-COVID, the PA General Assembly passes and Governor Wolf signs Act 77, broadly expanding absentee ballots. Support is bipartisan and overwhelmingly Republican: legiscan.com/PA/votes/SB421…
It provides for no-excuse absentee ballots: governor.pa.gov/newsroom/gover…
/4
It provides for no-excuse absentee ballots: governor.pa.gov/newsroom/gover…
/4
From October 2019 until the election on November 3, 2020, nobody says Act 77 violates the PA Constitution. In March 2020, it's updated modestly to address COVID. Pennsylvania legislature passes it unanimously.
Every Republican voted for it.
legiscan.com/PA/votes/SB422…
/5
Every Republican voted for it.
legiscan.com/PA/votes/SB422…
/5
Prior to the election, there's litigation over stuff like secrecy envelopes, late ballots, and poll-watchers (none of which would've made Biden lose). Nobody even hints Act 77 violates PA's constitution. Not Trump, not PA Republicans, not Justices Alito, Thomas, nor Gorsuch.
/6
/6
It's not until November 21—18 days after the election—that Republicans file a lawsuit claiming Act 77 is unconstitutional. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court says "uhhh no that's not how this works, you had over a year to claim that, the election is over." democracydocket.com/wp-content/upl…
/7
/7
And that, folks, is what Hawley is claiming with "I objected with regard to Pennsylvania because the state failed to follow its own constitution." That is, as shown above, outrageously false and was cooked up after Trump lost.
What Hawley really means is:
What Hawley really means is:
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1349802719679307784
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
