The Pennsylvania Supreme Court said voters should be allowed to cast provisional ballots in person at their polling place if their mail ballots are rejected because of certain defects, in a ruling Wednesday that could give thousands of Pennsylvanians the opportunity to vote even if their mail ballots were disqualified due to errors.
The ruling is a loss for the Republican National Committee, which appealed an intermediate court’s ruling that had sided with Butler County residents who had sued after the county refused to count their provisional ballots in the 2024 primary.
The practice of provisional voting is offered at in-person polling places when there is some question raised about a person’s eligibility to vote; the provisional vote is counted only after the person’s eligibility to vote is confirmed. In this case, the provisional vote would only count if the person’s mail ballot had been rejected.
The potential impact of the ruling in the critical battleground state isn’t entirely clear. Only about two-thirds of Pennsylvania counties notify mail voters ahead of Election Day if there is a fatal error on their mail ballot envelopes, but another pending case before the state Supreme Court is seeking to require that notice statewide. In addition to the option of provisional voting, at least 36 of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties also let mail voters correct errors on their mail ballots.
While the case arose out of Butler County, the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, which represented the voters in the case, is interpreting the ruling as applying to all counties in the Commonwealth. Lawyers for the RNC, which joined Butler County in defending the county’s policy, did not respond to CNN’s request for comment. The Democratic National Party intervened to argue in favor of allowing the provisional voting.
In the majority ruling, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said the relevant state statutes could not be read as barring provisional voting by voters whose mail ballots were rejected for errors like a lack of outer envelope or an incorrect date on the envelope. The court also said this interpretation aligned with the Pennsylvania Constitution’s voter protections.
“It is difficult to discern any principled reading of the Free and Fair Election Clause that would allow the disenfranchisement of voters as punishment for failure to conform to the mail-in voting requirements when voters properly availed themselves of the provisional voting mechanism,” the majority ruling said.
Democratic National Committee rapid response director Alex Floyd and Harris-Walz campaign spokesperson Charles Lutvak praised the court’s decision in a joint statement Wednesday.
“While Republicans try to block your vote, Democrats are protecting it and standing up for the principle that every eligible voter has a right to make their voice heard, no matter how they vote. And this ruling reaffirms that principle,” they said.