In Re: Canvass of Absentee and Mail-In Ballots of November 3, 2020 General Election

Summary

**Key Legal Topics:** Election law; absentee and mail-in ballot validity; mandatory vs. directory statutory interpretation; prospective application of judicial rulings. **Holdings/Rules:** The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that (1) ballots cannot be invalidated solely because the voter failed to handprint their name or address on the declaration envelope, as those requirements are prescribed by the Secretary of the Commonwealth under delegated authority, not by statute; and (2) the statutory requirement that voters date the declaration is mandatory, but because the law was unclear and voter guidance was confusing, the court applied its interpretation only prospectively, so ballots lacking dates in the 2020 election were not invalidated. Justice Wecht's concurring/dissenting opinion emphasized that "shall" in the Election Code must be read as mandatory, but agreed that prospective application was appropriate.

Holdings

1. A voter's failure to hand print his or her name and/or address on the declaration form on the ballot mailing envelope should not alone deny an elector his or her vote because these items are prescribed by the Secretary under delegated authority, not by statute, and absent evidence of legislative intent, omission should not invalidate.
2. The date requirement is mandatory; failure to date should invalidate the ballot, but only prospectively due to lack of adequate notice and confusion in guidance.

Questions Presented

1. Whether failure to handwrite the voter's name and address on the declaration form on the ballot mailing envelope requires disqualification of the ballot.
2. Whether failure to handwrite the date on the declaration form on the ballot mailing envelope requires disqualification of the ballot.

Disposition

affirmed