>>11410872 (PB)

Dunno ... apparently (see yesterday's reasoning on drive-through voting) there is a legal basis to argue against allowing changes to the rules after the election process has begun. That would go to SCOTUS, for sure. The states have the right to set the election rules beforehand ... the Constitution guarantees that ... but do they have the right to change those rules after the election day set by the Constitution? At that point, the election has already been run and any change to the rules is "ex post facto" (after the fact) and our entire body of law reaching back to before the revolution, says that that is not permitted.

So I don't see any future for any such laws enacted after close of polls tomorrow.