Delaware violating State Constitution for mid-terms CHEATING!.

Delaware violating their own state constitution for the mid-terms.

The conclusion:

. . . the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) filed suit on behalf of two Delaware residents, including a candidate for state representative, against the Delaware Department of Elections, arguing the no-excuse absentee voting and same-day registration violates the Delaware constitution.

“These mail balloting and same day registration laws conflict with the Delaware Constitution,” PILF President J. Christian Adams said. “States cannot pass laws that conflict with their constitutions. It’s egregious that Inspectors of Elections are forced to choose between obeying the same day registration law or following the state constitution. Delaware lawmakers should read their own constitution before passing election laws.”

While the legislature’s adoption of no-excuse mail-in voting and same-day registration seems to represent a clear violation of the plain language of the Delaware constitution, the state Supreme Court will be the ultimate arbiter of the question. And currently, all five Delaware Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democrat governors.

Of course, politics does not necessarily dictate the outcome of cases, and given the clarity of the Delaware constitution, the state Supreme Court justices may nonetheless hold that their fellow Democrats in the legislative branch overstepped their authority. But at least in Pennsylvania, where the constitution was similarly clear, thePennsylvania Supreme Court yesterday in a 5-2 decision upheld the legislature’s approval of no-excuse voting, with the five-justice majority consisting of Democrat justices and the sole two Republicans in dissent.

The outcome of the Pennsylvania case shows how far activist justices were willing to go to reach a desired result, even when it conflicted with the plain language of their state constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision also reveals the lack of concern the Democrat justices place on election integrity because at the time the constitutional provisions were adopted by the people in Pennsylvania, citizens recognized that absentee voting would “break down all the safeguards of honest suffrage.”

If Pennsylvania and public sentiments prove prescient, the Delaware Democrat justices will care no more about election integrity than their fellow Democrats.

Delaware Allowing Widespread Mail-In Voting Violates Constitution LINK