To the editor: The case now pending earlier than the U.S. Supreme Court docket might require that mail-in ballots be acquired by election day to be legitimate and counted (“Californians may need to mail ballots early as Supreme Court signals support for new election day deadline,” March 23).
Proscribing the states’ guidelines of when mail-in ballots will be counted might sound innocuous sufficient at first blush, however is in actuality yet one more facet of President Trump and the GOP’s marketing campaign to limit voting. Trump has already pushed the theory that voting restrictions (and thus fewer voters) will make it extra possible that Republicans will prevail in elections. Working People are typically much less capable of take break day to go to the polls in individual on election day, and due to this fact extra prone to vote by mail. Many of these working Americans are presently pissed off with the GOP and due to this fact extra prone to help Democrats.
Trump’s specious theories about fraud being inherent in mail-in voting have been shown to be virtually completely false. One other one among Trump’s options to a non-existent downside.
This case in search of to limit mail-in voting is actually yet one more harmful prong within the total Republican effort to restrict the voters.
Ernest S. Gould, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: So, Supreme Court docket Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Samuel A. Alito Jr. expressed issues that state legal guidelines permitting mail-in ballots to be counted after election day so long as they have been postmarked on or earlier than election day in some way taint the election course of.
I simply paid my federal and state revenue taxes for 2025, in addition to my property tax invoice for 2025-26. In every case, the federal government entity (federal, state and county) permits cost by mail so long as the cost envelope is postmarked on or earlier than the desired due date.
Neither justice cited the violation of any federal statute or constitutional provision in help of his remarks. Apparently, they every subscribe to the Trump philosophy of constructing selections based mostly solely on intestine intuition, reasonably than a factual evaluation of related historical past or case legislation.
Noel Johnson, Glendale
