Act 77 Rejection Follow-Up

Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., F.A.C.P., Act 77 Rejection Follow-Up
February 2, 2022  Philadelphia, PA

Already analyzed is the Opinion showing why *Act 77 is Unconstitutional* and how it may prompt judicial implementation of the only reasonable remedy, a revote (inasmuch as all ballots have been admixed), because this ruling impacts ab initio of passage of Act 77. Also recognized was the gravamen of the rhetorical conflict [Article VII, § 1] that entitles the elector to “offer to vote” in the election district where “he or she shall have resided” 60 days before “the election.” This is the “place requirement” that compels the citizen to “offer to vote” in his/her home precinct, elaborated upon by the PA Supreme Court:

To “offer to vote” by ballot, is to present oneself, with proper qualifications, at the time and place appointed, and to make manual delivery of the ballot to the officers appointed by law to receive it. The ballot cannot be sent by mail or express, nor can it be cast outside of all Pennsylvania election districts and certified into the county where the voter has his domicil. We cannot be persuaded that the constitution […]

April 15th, 2022|Categories: Articles|0 Comments

Act 77 is Unconstitutional

Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., F.A.C.P.
rsklaroff@gmail.comAct 77 is Unconstitutional
January 29, 2022, Philadelphia, PA

The Commonwealth Court view that the PA mail-in voting law (Act 77) is unconstitutional was understandably uncritically celebrated, including on Bannon’s War Room (10 a.m. and 11 a.m., including input by Sam Faddis plus threads) but—to anticipate reversal by the Dem-dominated Supreme Court—key components of the *Opinion* must be parsed. Wally Zimolong had successfully argued the filing by Bradford County Commissioner Doug McLinko and a group of GOP state reps; on-cue, lefties running the Insurrection Index swung into action, claiming McLinko had attended Trump’s “Stop the Steal Rally” on J-6.

Highlighted during Bannon’s review was a startling observation that, as dicta, cries for a follow-up filing that could challenge all results of the 11/3/2020 election {page 45}:

Not a single case cited by the Acting Secretary stands for the proposition that a legislature can prevent judicial review of a statute, whose constitutionality is challenged, with a statute of limitations of any duration. This is because, simply, an unconstitutional statute is void ab initio.

This Lingua Latina phrase “ab initio” suggests that everything done after Act 77 passage is vulnerable including, of course, […]

April 15th, 2022|Categories: Articles|0 Comments