October 20, 2020

CNN's Alysin Camerota talked to Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro this morning about the SCOTUS decision that allowed a PA state supreme court ruling to stand.

"The Supreme Court rejected the Republican push to require all ballots be received in Pennsylvania by Election Day. So tell us what this means for Pennsylvania and your reaction when you heard it," Camerota said.

Shapiro said he was "pleased" with the reaction.

"Time and time again I've told the people of Pennsylvania that I would secure and protect their vote and we've beaten them in court just to be able to do that. They haven't won a single case. And now the rules are set," he said.

"But practically speaking, what does it mean? Because in Pennsylvania you can't start counting the votes, as I understand it, until 7 a.m. on Election Day. And so, is it highly possible that we won't have an answer in Pennsylvania on election night?" Camerota asked.

Shapiro explained that Trump sued to eliminate the drop boxes where people are returning their ballots, and also tried to unwind a state Supreme Court decision that said as long as your ballots are postmarked by 8 p.m. on Election Day and received three days later by 5 p.m., they would be counted.

"And the Supreme Court of the United States essentially reaffirmed that with their ruling. Look, we should want all votes to count, not fewer, but Donald Trump has recklessly been trying to sow doubt in this process and limit the voices of the people of Pennsylvania. What this assures is that they'll count," Shapiro said.

"As for when we'll know results, I think you're going to have a real good sense of where Pennsylvania is going in the early, early hours of Wednesday morning. Between the precinct votes and the overall trends of the votes by mail I think there you'll have a real good sense statewide. You won't have the precise number, certainly, for a few days, but think you'll have a real good sense of where things are going."

Camerota noted the Supreme Court decision last night was a 4-4 vote.

"Is it your sense that if and when Amy Coney Barrett is seated or if she had been seated that this would have gone differently?" she said.

Shapiro said chief Justice John Roberts "cares deeply about the credibility of this court and protecting the election and giving the American people confidence in the election process. I think that's a good thing. But I think it's also clear in a 4-4 case like this that would there be a Justice Barrett that would be a pivotal vote, obviously. She would have to go one way or the other.

"The bottom line here is this. We are deep in the fourth quarter of this game. It would be really reckless and irresponsible for any court, let alone the Supreme Court of the United States, to change the rules of the game while people are already voting."

Legal analysts warn this split decision is a harbinger of things to come with Barrett voting on the Supreme Court:

Can you help us out?

For nearly 20 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.