Welcome back, Deadline: Legal Bulletin readers. The Supreme Court on Friday night rejected a republican offer of Pennsylvania to block the counting of certain ballots in the swing state. But on Wednesday, the court sided with the GOP in approving a purge of voters. in Virginia. We’ll have to see which court shows up next week and during any upcoming election litigation.

In the case of PennsylvaniaRepublicans wanted judges block the counting of provisional votes by voters whose mail-in ballots are rejected due to technical defects. The high court rejected the challenge and Justice Samuel Alito issued a ruling. attached statement That said, the case raised an issue of “considerable importance.” But in the statement joined by other GOP appointees, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, he said procedural issues in the appeal meant they couldn’t give relief to Republicans even if they wanted to.

In the Virginia case, roberts court on the side of the republicans due to the dissent of the three Democratic appointees. And what was the majority’s rationale for approving the purge of the state’s voters in apparent violation of federal law? gave without explanation for the failure hit American citizens from the lists, despite the state’s claim that it sought to expel noncitizens. While the order applies to a state that is not considered a major battleground, it sets a troubling precedent for any future election litigation.

The judges rejected Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s bids. Arrive off the ballot in undecided states Wisconsin and Michigan. the court previously rejected Kennedy’s quest to get in The New York elections, after the former independent candidate suspended his campaign in August and endorsed Trump. Michigan lawyers successfully opposed Kennedy’s appeal pointed out that he did not explain “how he can be irreparably hurt by the very thing he asked to be granted in New York.”

That didn’t stop Gorsuch to dissent. The Trump-appointed judge said he was persuaded by the opinions of Trump-appointed appeals court judges. who said Kennedy raised a crucial question: “Does forcing a person to vote at the polls compel them to speak out in violation of the First Amendment?” But the court did not consider it important enough to address it.

Cornel West He also lost in the high court this week. He spoiler candidate sought an order posted at Pennsylvania polling sites telling voters they can write him in for president. But Alito, who covers emergency orders in that region, rejected West’s risky bet. on your owneffectively considering him unworthy of being referred to the full court.

The judges return to the bench Monday to kick off November’s two-week discussion session with a handful of audiences not related to elections. While each appeal may be important, we will keep an eye on any additional orders in voting cases, both before and after Election Day. The question I posed at the beginning of the period: “Will the Republican-appointed majority find a way to put the republican candidate Back in office? — remains open.

Do you have any questions or comments for me? I’d love to hear from you! Send an email [email protected] for a chance to be featured in a future newsletter.