>>11595260 (pb)
Re: Marks v Stinson
...."II. Voting by Mail Creates Unique Risks of
Fraud, Including in Pennsylvania.
"The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision suffers from another critical defect: it enhanced risks of fraudulent voting by mail. Overwhelming
public evidence demonstrates that voting by mail presents unique opportunities for fraud and abuse, opportunities which unscrupulous actors have often exploited. The decision below [trial court decision] exacerbated these risks.
"For decades, responsible observers have cautioned about the grave risks of fraud in voting by mail. In Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, this Court held that fraudulent voting “perpetrated using absentee ballots” demonstrates “that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.” Crawford v. MarionCounty Election Bd., 553 U.S. 181, 195-96 (2008) (opinion of Stevens, J.) (emphasis added).
"The Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform emphasized the same concern. The bipartisan Commission—co-chaired by former
President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker—determined that “[a]bsentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” BUILDING CONFIDENCE IN U.S. ELECTIONS: REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON FEDERAL ELECTION REFORM, at 46 (Sept. 2005). According to the Carter-Baker Commission, “[a]bsentee balloting is
vulnerable to abuse in several ways.” Id. These abuses include interception of blank ballots, “pressure” and “intimidation” of elderly and vulnerable voters, “vote buying schemes” that are “far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail,” and ballot tampering by third-party operatives after a ballot is marked.The Commission noted that “absentee balloting in
other states has been a major source of fraud.”
And the Commission recommended that “States… need to do more to prevent … absentee ballot fraud.” The most recent edition of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Manual on Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, published by its Public Integrity Section, highlights the very same concerns. See U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses (8th ed. Dec. 2017), at 28-29 (“DOJ Manual”). The Manual states: “Absentee ballots are particularly susceptible to fraudulent abuse because, by definition, they are marked and cast outside the presence of election officials and the structured environment of a polling place.” Id. The Manual reports that “the more common ways” that election-fraud “crimes are committed include … [o]btaining and marking absentee ballots without the active input of the voters involved.” Id. at 28. And the Manual notes that “[a]bsentee ballot frauds” committed both with and without the voter’s participation are “common.”
"Similarly, the U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded that many crimes of election fraud likely go undetected. In 2014, discussing election fraud, the GAO reported that “crimes of fraud, in particular, are difficult to detect, as those involved are engaged in intentional deception.” GAO-14-634, Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws 62-63 (U.S. Gov’t Accountability Office Sept.(2014)."....
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-542/160113/20201109134744257_2020-11-09%20-%20Republican%20Party%20of%20Pa.%20v.%20Boockvar%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Missouri%20et%20al.%20-%20Final%20With%20Tables.pdf