In a recent development, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania approved with a majority of 6-1 that the Secretary of State possesses the rightful authority to prevent county voting machines from granting accessibility to ‘unauthorised third parties’. Any violation of this directive may result in decertification of those machines, rendering them unfit to be used in future elections.
This resolution emanated from a clash between the Department of State and Fulton County, instigated by the actions of two Republican county commissioners who consented to Wake Technology Services Inc. examining and extracting data from Dominion voting machines in 2021. The state election body responded to this instance with a directive to prevent such third-party interventions, sighting potential security compromises.
In the wake of the Wake TSI examination, Fulton county’s voting machines were subjected to decertification, prompting Fulton County and the Republican County Commissioners Randy Bunch and Stuart Ulsh to launch a legal action against the Secretary of State.
Fulton County was under the impression that it held a significant dominion over the voting machines. Meanwhile, the Secretary of State refuted this claim, asserting that if that indeed was the case, it would imply that each county board of elections possesses unfettered liberty to handle the electronic voting systems assigned to inspect elections. The Secretary deemed this inference as ‘unreasonable’ and ‘absurd’.
Moreover, Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer, representing the majority, disagreed with Fulton’s interpretation. She cited a 1937 state election law, stating that while it bestowed the county election boards with extensive authority, the legislators have subsequently introduced amendments to position the Secretary as a crucial figure in preserving statewide consistency and security, particularly concerning electronic voting systems.
She further detailed on the concept of the balance of power on the state and local levels over elections and voting machines. According to the majority opinion, this balance is instrumental in ensuring free, fair, and secure elections.
Judge Jubelirer argued that no discrepancies exist between these stipulations. She explained that it remains entirely plausible, and indeed essential, for county election boards to execute their obligations, whilst staying aligned with the Secretary’s reports and directives.
The Department of State reacted positively to the decision. They issued a statement expressing their appreciation for the verdict, reinforcing the position of Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro, who is determined to safeguard the free and secure administration of elections.
The statement also emphasized that the court’s decision underscores the Secretary’s power to keep voting systems secure from unauthorized third-parties. It infers that such protective measures are vital in maintaining confidence in Pennsylvania’s electoral procedures and avoiding any unwarranted influence.
With regards to Fulton’s failed claims, it is important to note that if their logic was upheld, it would lead to a chaotic electoral system with each county board doing as it pleases. This ridiculous stand was thankfully brushed aside by the court in favor of a more reasonable and intelligent interpretation of the law.
Therefore, it appears that the state has taken a reasonable stance—preventing third-party interference, which could potentially disrupt the integrity of the election process. Their efforts in securing the election are worthy of attention and admiration.
It’s also worth mentioning that Stuart Ulsh, one of the commissioners involved in the initial dispute, no longer holds his position as an elected county commissioner. Meanwhile, the voting machines entangled in the disagreement have been substituted by Fulton county after being seized by the court.
This ruling has solidified the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State in preserving the integrity of electoral activities against any unauthorized, potentially harmful third-party interferences. It is a testimony to the abiding spirit of checks and balances, crucial for conducting free, fair, and secure elections.