Nevada Supreme Court Rules on Ballot Case

I would imagine the GOP is once again wondering why we even have election rules after another bizarre ruling by the Nevada Supreme Court.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) challenged, or should I say offered a different interpretation of the rule in place.

Five of the seven judges on the state Supreme Court disagreed with the RNC’s interpretation, thereby allowing non-postmarked ballots to be counted in the election if they are received within three days of the election.

So Much for Rules

Every state has election rules in place, especially for absentee ballots.

Those ballots generally have to be clearly postmarked by the election day. They are usually required to be received within a specified window from the date to allow for ballots to be received that were mailed and postmarked on election day.

The GOP was trying to block ballots with no postmark or improperly postmarked, as they could potentially have been filled out after election day.

In its infinite wisdom, the Nevada Supreme Court stated that it was too late in the election cycle to challenge rules, and five of the seven justices ruled against the challenge.

The RNC responded, "Requiring ballots to be postmarked on or before election day is a critical election integrity safeguard that ensures ballots mailed after election day are not counted.”

A Democrat election attorney, Bradley Schrager, took a victory lap, stating, “We are gratified that the Nevada Supreme Court recognized not only that state laws should be construed to favor the rights of voters to cast their ballots and have them counted, but also that lawsuits like this one so close to the general election tend to promote confusion and chaos rather than orderly democratic processes.”

I only have two comments on this one…

First, why did the RNC take so long to file the suit? We are seeing this time and again. They had four years to get this straightened out, yet they continue to file these suits at the last minute and continue to be defeated on those grounds.

Second, since when does the timeliness of something matter when it comes to upholding the law and election integrity?

These court decisions and their reasoning are simply bewildering to me.