PA State Senator Reminds Everyone What Happens if ‘Mounting Evidence’ Proves Election Was Compromised
A Republican state senator from Pennsylvania suggested the state legislature might be inclined to throw out the commonwealth’s presidential election results if the election is shown to have been “compromised.”
State Sen. Doug Mastriano indicated Saturday on Twitter that some Pennsylvania Republicans are considering a maneuver that would let the legislature select its own delegates to the Electoral College.
Citing “mounting evidence” of “corruption,” Mastriano laid out the legal basis for such a move.
In a thread on Twitter, the Republican signaled he and other Pennsylvania lawmakers take allegations of fraud and other voting irregularities seriously.
“There is mounting evidence that the PA presidential election was compromised,” Mastriano wrote.
“If this is the case, under Article II, Section 1.2 of the US Constitution, the state legislature has the sole authority to direct the manner of selecting delegates to the Electoral College,” he added.
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.”
In a separate tweet, Mastriano cited a potential need to void the election results so as to prevent voters from becoming disenfranchised.
“This power was given to the state legislature for the purpose of safeguarding the appointment of our President, specifically contemplating corruption and ensuring that the people are not disenfranchised through a corrupt election process,” he wrote.
Mastriano indicated he intends to push for the Republican-controlled legislature to appoint its own delegates should the election be shown to have been “compromised,” rather than allow the disputed results, which show Democrat Joe Biden winning the state, to stand.
“Therefore, we are introducing a Resolution to exercise our obligation and authority to appoint delegates to the Electoral College,” he tweeted.
President Donald Trump’s legal team has alleged widespread election fraud in the state. While there have been multiple alleged instances of voting irregularities in Pennsylvania and elsewhere, proof has yet to surface of widespread nefarious activity that affected the final results of the presidential election.
The Pennsylvania Republican made the announcement on Twitter a day after a Pennsylvania judge defended her decision to order a temporary halt to any actions to certify the state’s 2020 presidential election results pending a hearing on a lawsuit that seeks to void millions of potentially unconstitutional mail-in ballots.
Commonwealth Court Judge Patricia McCullough explained her reasoning for halting the certification process in a memorandum opinion on Friday.
Her Wednesday ruling had recognized legal issues with the mail-in ballots, rather than any arguments pertaining to alleged voter fraud.
A group of state Republicans, including Rep. Mike Kelly and 2020 congressional candidate Sean Parnell, filed a lawsuit claiming the state’s 2019 expansion of “no-excuse” mail-in voting “violated the state constitution’s limits on who can cast an absentee ballot,” Law360 reported.
“Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment,” McCullough wrote Friday.
“Since this presents an issue of law which has already been thoroughly briefed by the parties, this Court can state that Petitioners have a likelihood of success on the merits of its Pennsylvania Constitutional claim.”
Under Pennsylvania law, any voter can choose to vote by mail, but to qualify for an absentee ballot, Pennsylvania voters must provide a valid reason to request such a ballot.
Act 77, which was signed into law in October 2019, created no excuse mail-in voting for all Pennsylvania voters and a 50-day period for voters to request and submit these ballots.
According to the lawsuit, these ballots should be deemed “unconstitutional” because Act 77 overrides legal limitations on absentee voting.
“Act 77 is the most expansive and fundamental change to the Pennsylvania voting code, implemented illegally, to date,” the plaintiffs wrote.
“[It] is another illegal attempt to override the limitations on absentee voting prescribed in the Pennsylvania Constitution, without first following the necessary procedure to amend the constitution to allow for the expansion.”
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.