if Trump "loses" the election, can he contest the validity of mail in ballots? will Supreme Court maybe side with him now since Amy Barret?
and if so, will they appoint a new election and make anyone who sent mail in ballots to have to go to a poll to vote? mean time will there be a civil war due to mass riots and protests?
- Tmess2Lv 74 weeks agoFavorite Answer
It depends. Every state does balloting slightly differently, and every state has different rules for election contests.
For the most part, Trump can't successfully contest the concept of mail-in ballots. Every state authorizes mail-in ballots. Even the most conservative members of the Supreme Court will not support intervening in a state election contest in a manner that is inconsistent with state statues. (That has been their big push in the past month to enforce state statutes over state constitutions.)
So Trump will be limited to contesting specific mail-in ballots. And here is where things can get tricky.
It is one thing for a court to examine the rejection of an invalid ballot. If the court concludes that the ballot was valid, it just adds the vote on that ballot to the total.
But if a ballot was accepted, it simply goes into the mix and is counted with other accepted ballots. There is no way after the vote is counted to pull out any individual ballot and connect it to a particular voter. Now, if there is a group of ballots that have the same issue (e.g., no postmark on the envelope so the local election authority can't determine if it was mailed before the deadline), those ballots could -- potentially -- be counted as a separate group from other accepted ballots. If that happens, the election contest is simple -- those ballots are excluded from the count.
But if you can't separate the erroneously accepted ballots from the valid ballots, then you are in a different type of contest. In such a contest, you have to prove that there are enough dubious votes to call the result into question. (Enough is based on the margin of victory. If you lose by 200,000 votes, showing 1,000 mail-in ballots were improperly counted is not enough to invalidate the election.) It would still be hard to get to the U.S. Supreme Court because there would have to be an issue of federal law, not state law. Perhaps, Trump will complain that the state courts are modifying the rules for what is a valid ballot, but the Supreme Court will probably leave these cases to the state courts..
In the unlikely event that Trump won an election contest (which has never happened in a presidential race), it is unclear what would happen. States have until December 8 to certify the electors that were chosen by that state. However, those electors must have been chosen by the law in effect on November 3 (the date for choosing electors). If no electors are chosen because the election is tossed out, the State would have to quickly hold a new election (or have rules in place for choosing an elector in that circumstance). If a state is unable to choose electors, it simply does not get to vote in the electoral college. The only time that has happened was in 1864, and Abraham Lincoln won enough electoral votes that the absence of some states did not matter to his winning the election. There is simply no precedent for whether the failure of a state to choose electors reduces the number needed to win. If it doesn't, there is a real chance that the House would get to choose the President.
I don't think we will reach the level of civil war over this, but, if the chaos causes the election to go to the House, there could be some very serious political consequences in 2022 and 2024 and real consideration of changes to the rules.
- VanillaVoodooLv 64 weeks ago
Trump will do nothing of the sort. Conspiracies aside, I am fairly certain he wants to lose at this point or at least doesn't care whether he wins or loses. If he loses he will say some words to keep the Republican voter base fired up but, right on schedule, he will leave office just like every other president before him that has lost an election.
- TraciLv 54 weeks ago
He should contest the mail in ballots regardless of who wins.. there will be widespread cheating there by the commie dems.. you can bet on it!
- Anonymous4 weeks ago
I guess he could, but that's what Joe would do. There are 3 liberal justices & Roberts on the court. Before Amy, the court ruled that mail in ballots can be counted if they're received by November 20. That favors democrats.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 4 weeks ago
Every day there are stories of problems with mail in ballots involving tens of thousands of ballots.
- KathyLv 74 weeks ago
He could try to contest the mail in votes, but the Supreme Court will not side with him. She is not the only Supreme Court justice.
- DCCCLXXXVIIILv 74 weeks ago
If The Constitution and precedence were strictly followed even RGB would have had to side with Trump.
- Anonymous4 weeks ago
I believe that has been the plan since he took office.
- SusieLv 74 weeks ago
I’m sure the election will be contested unless it is a massive landslide, as the libs have made sure to create as much election fraud and problems as they could. If an election can’t be decided by a certain date, the House of Representatives, not the Supreme Court, will pick the president. This is in the constitution. It’s no wonder the libs WANT a contested election.
- Wage SlaveLv 74 weeks ago
Yes, and yes. Invalidating likely-Democrat votes is most likely the first strategy by the Trump camp to ensure he wins regardless of how the vote goes. If Amy Barret had any integrity, she'd recuse herself from such a case, but I suspect she won't do that.
The Trump administration is also working with red-leaning swing states to potentially overrule the state's popular vote if it goes to Biden and send loyal Trump electors to the EC anyway too, even if the state votes for Biden.