Sounds about right to me. But then, I’m inclined to be sensible like that, see.

Supreme Court sounds skeptical of late-arriving ballots, a Trump target
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ‘s conservative majority on Monday sounded skeptical of state laws that allow the counting of late-arriving mail ballots, a persistent target of President Donald Trump.

A ruling, likely to come by late June, that bars counting ballots arriving after Election Day would send officials scrambling in 14 states and the District of Columbia, just a few months before the 2026 midterm congressional elections to change their ballot rules.

An additional 15 states that have more forgiving deadlines for ballots from military and overseas voters also could be affected.

The legal challenge is part of Trump’s broader attack on most mail balloting, which he has said breeds fraud despite strong evidence to the contrary and years of experience in numerous states. Trump has repeatedly claimed that his loss to Joe Biden in 2020 resulted from fraud even though more than 60 court decisions and his own attorney general said that argument had no merit.

The court heard arguments in a case from Mississippi pitting the state against Trump’s Republican administration and the Republican and Libertarian parties. At issue is whether federal law sets a single Election Day that requires ballots to be both cast by voters and received by state officials.

Via Ace, who adds:

It’s obviously just farming fake votes to steal elections in the unconstitutional overtime period.

And the Justices appear to believe that when the Constitution specifies an Election Day, it means AN Election DAY, not an election week or an election month or an unspecified election period allowing the printing of millions of fake ballots.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that his loss to Joe Biden in 2020 resulted from fraud even though more than 60 court decisions and his own attorney general said that argument had no merit.

1, that’s all false, and 2, this has nothing to do with the actual legal question at hand, which is: When the Constitution speaks of an (singular) Election Day, do they mean it or were they just joshing?

It’s amazing how leftwing communists routinely invent words and penumbras that don’t appear in the Constitution, but, when faced with the Constitution’s actual words, claim “Oh that doesn’t matter, that’s like 100 years old, man.”

“Amazing” isn’t quite strong enough to meet the case, but maybe that’s just cynical ol’ me talking.