Conservative host Mark Levin argued that the citizenry of Pennsylvania was disenfranchised by unconstitutional actions of election officials in that state, during "Life, Liberty & Levin" on Fox News.
Election laws must be made by state legislatures, not governors or state supreme courts, according to the U.S. Constitution.
“The citizenry of Pennsylvania, we talk about disenfranchisement, they weren’t asked to vote on this change in their election laws for mail-in ballots, let alone all these other changes the state supreme court made," said Levin, a native Philadelphian. "They weren’t asked at all; they were utterly disenfranchised."
“The moment the state legislature in October 2019 passed the change to its election laws to allow mail-in voting as the base, they violated the state constitution of Pennsylvania. Now why is that? Under the constitution of Pennsylvania, if there is to be any election law changes, you have to amend the constitution. Did they amend the constitution? No."
A full transcript of the referred to section of Life, Liberty, and Levin follows:
Levin: Fourteen months ago in the State of Pennsylvania, if you had voted by mail-in ballot, it would have been discarded. If that mail-in ballot had been counted, that would have been fraud. Fourteen months ago in the State of Pennsylvania, if you sent in a ballot without a signature, that ballot would be discarded. If it was counted, that would be criminal fraud. Fourteen months ago in the State of Pennsylvania, if you sent in a ballot with a signature that didn’t match the signature that they had on file, that would be discarded. If it was counted, that would be criminal fraud. Fourteen months ago in the State of Pennsylvania, if you sent in a ballot beyond Election Day, it wouldn’t be counted. And if it was, that would be fraud. If you sent in a ballot without a postal stamp date on it, it wouldn't be counted and if it was, that would be fraud. Or if you sent in a ballot where they couldn’t tell what the date was because maybe there was a smudge on the ink, it wouldn't be counted and if it was counted, that was fraud.
All of those ballots today count. They were all counted in Pennsylvania because of unconstitutional and illegal changes that were made by officials and made “officially” by individuals in Pennsylvania. None of this is discussed in a single newsroom in America on a single TV show, radio show, or any other show. So, I want to slowly walk you through what took place in Pennsylvania. And this sort of thing has taken place to some degree or another in numerous states.
October 2019, 14 months ago, the Republican state legislature in Pennsylvania passed an omnibus bill called Act 77. In Act 77, they included language there changing their election laws to allow universal mail-in voting. The problem is, Pennsylvania, being an old state, having an old constitution, one of the original state legislatures, didn’t allow that. There wasn’t even early voting in Pennsylvania. The only way you could have a mail-in vote was through the absentee ballot, and you had to go through a process there, a multi-step process, in order to get an absentee ballot. Well, you might say, "well what about COVID-19?" In October 2019, there was no COVID-19, was there? There was no virus. This push for mail-in voting has been going on with the Democrats for at least a decade. One of the first places they imposed it was in California, among other things, and they tried to do this in every state. So, the Republican state legislature in Pennsylvania buckled; they passed it, as I say, it's part of this omnibus bill and the Democrat governor, who is a leftist, signed it almost immediately. And in fact, all these state-wide offices in Pennsylvania, you have left-wing Democrats in those offices and you have a Republican legislature. Okay, that’s the mail-in voting. What else happened?
Well, what else happened was the governor didn’t think it went far enough so he goes to the legislature and says "you know the signature requirements? We really shouldn’t have that. The postmark requirements, we really don’t need that. These other requirements that it has to be in by Election Day, there ought to be a few more days afterwards where we can count the ballots." The legislature said "no, no, we’re not going to do that." He said "oh yes you are." So he winds up going to the supreme court of Pennsylvania. The supreme court of Pennsylvania has seven justices. Couple years ago, they had an election for three justices. The Republicans really weren’t paying attention to it; the Democrats were, and they backed three hardcore leftists for the supreme court of Pennsylvania, among other things; they were thinking in 2020. The labor unions poured in a fortune; the teacher unions poured in a fortune; the usual groups poured in a fortune and they won all three seats. And now the makeup of the Pennsylvania supreme court -- as they say, the members are elected -- is five-to-two Democrat, and the Democrats, when it comes to election law, those five stick together, much like the three Democrats and John Roberts on the U.S. Supreme Court. So what did those Democrats do? They said "you know what? We have a good idea." A few months before the election, they said, "yes, no signatures required; you don’t need signature comparisons and you don’t need a postal date. And if the postal date is smudged, you’re going to count it anyway. Oh and yes, even though Election Day ends on Tuesday, 8pm Eastern Time, we’re going to extend it to 5pm Eastern Time on Friday." They had no legal or constitutional basis for doing any of that. So they violated Article II, Section 1 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which leaves the power to the state legislature to make the election.
Now let’s circle back. Stay with me here. The reason why reporters don’t cover this is either they’re left-wing or they're too stupid to follow this. The moment the state legislature in October 2019 passed the change to its election laws to allow mail-in voting as the base, they violated the state constitution of Pennsylvania. Now why is that? Under the constitution of Pennsylvania, if there is to be any election law changes, you have to amend the constitution. Did they amend the constitution? No. What's required to amend the constitution of Pennsylvania? It's very complicated. There needs to be a majority vote of both houses of the state legislature, not once, but twice. Then there needs to be a respite; then there needs to be ads in at least two papers in every county in Pennsylvania, all 67 counties. Then there needs to be a respite. And then, finally, the citizenry of Pennsylvania get to vote on whether or not they want the amendment; it has to be on the ballot. Did that happen? No, it didn’t happen. The citizenry of Pennsylvania, we talk about disenfranchisement, they weren’t asked to vote on this change in their election laws for mail-in ballots, let alone all these other changes the state supreme court made. They weren’t asked at all; they were utterly disenfranchised.
Alexander Watson is a CNSNews intern and Christendom College graduate. Lucy Collins is a CNSNews intern and a student at Columbia University.