South Carolina

sl8

(16,245 posts) Sun Oct 11, 2020, 05:59 AM Oct 2020

S.C. absentee ballot received by a voter after SCOTUS ruling ... [Twitter]

Link to tweet

Trip Gabriel
@tripgabriel

S.C. absentee ballot received by a voter after SCOTUS ruling Monday that witness signatures *are* required. Seems likely to lead to many discarded votes.

[picture of ballot]

2:03 PM · Oct 10, 2020

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

S.C. absentee ballot received by a voter after SCOTUS ruling ... [Twitter] (Original Post) sl8 Oct 2020 OP

Then we need to take this to court immediately that the ballot instructions are incorrect still_one Oct 2020 #1

It's already been to the US Supreme Court SCantiGOP Oct 2020 #3

That is a different issue. The ballot instructions are not reflecting that ruling, and that is what still_one Oct 2020 #4

I don't see how they can flip-flop on this the way they have right before the election nt Shermann Oct 2020 #2

That is why this needs to be taken to the court again because the ballot instructions are not still_one Oct 2020 #5

still_one

(96,542 posts)

1. Then we need to take this to court immediately that the ballot instructions are incorrect

Reply to sl8 (Original post)

Sun Oct 11, 2020, 07:13 AM

Oct 2020

There is still time to correct this.

SCantiGOP

(14,239 posts)

3. It's already been to the US Supreme Court

Reply to still_one (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 11, 2020, 09:33 AM

Oct 2020

That’s who issued the ruling requiring witness signature.

still_one

(96,542 posts)

4. That is a different issue. The ballot instructions are not reflecting that ruling, and that is what

Reply to SCantiGOP (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 11, 2020, 09:41 AM

Oct 2020

needs to be presented, for those who have a ballot rejected because of no witness signature, it is incumbent upon the state to send those rejected ballots because of no witness signature, a new ballot with an addendum explaining that a witness signature is required

Shermann

(8,642 posts)

2. I don't see how they can flip-flop on this the way they have right before the election nt

Reply to sl8 (Original post)

Sun Oct 11, 2020, 07:46 AM

Oct 2020

still_one

(96,542 posts)

5. That is why this needs to be taken to the court again because the ballot instructions are not

Reply to Shermann (Reply #2)

Sun Oct 11, 2020, 09:44 AM

Oct 2020

reflecting the required witness ruling, and it needs to be argued before the court that
those who have a ballot rejected because of no witness signature, it is incumbent upon the state to send those rejected ballots because of no witness signature, a new ballot with an addendum explaining that a witness signature is required

Reply to this discussion