A judge in Pennsylvania has determined that neither voters nor election officials are allowed to fix or count mail-in ballots that are returned without the necessary secrecy envelope, commonly known as “naked ballots.”
In a clear-cut decision, Judge S. Michael Yeager of the Butler County Court of Common Pleas rejected a petition challenging the Butler County Board of Elections’ decision to discard mail-in ballots missing the required secrecy envelopes, commonly known as ‘naked’ ballots.
The case emerged after two Butler County residents, Faith A. Genser and Frank P. Matis, did not include the required secrecy envelopes when they submitted their mail-in ballots for the April 23, 2024, primary election.
Although they were notified that their ballots were rejected due to the missing secrecy envelopes, both voters chose to cast provisional ballots on Election Day in the hopes that their votes would still be counted.
However, the Butler County Board of Elections, following Pennsylvania’s strict election regulations, rejected these provisional ballots. This decision led to the court case filed by ACLU Pennsylvania.
The court determined that the Butler County Board of Elections acted within its legal authority by rejecting provisional ballots that were submitted without the required secrecy envelopes.
The ruling stated that these “naked” ballots do not comply with Pennsylvania’s Election Code, which requires that all mail-in ballots be completed, placed in a secrecy envelope, and then enclosed in a Declaration Envelope before being submitted.
The judge emphasized that allowing such ballots to be counted would undermine the very foundation of secure and fair elections. By failing to comply with these regulations, voters risk disenfranchising themselves and compromising the integrity of the electoral process.
According to the conclusion:
The court is not unsympathetic to the Petitioners. Unlike many other qualified electors, Petitioners endeavored to exercise their right to vote so as to participate as fully as possible in their governance.
The court understands their frustration, and additionally, that of persons who deposit their ballot into the mail only to return home to find the secrecy envelope on a table, yet, despite knowing with certainty their secrecy envelope was not included in their return, may do nothing to have their vote counted in the election.
However, as stated by the Court in Boockvar, this is a task for the legislature, not the courts, given the attendant issues that must be addressed. The court would urge the legislature to consider the situation of the Petitioners, to develop and implement a procedure for those who return defective ballots to correct same to ensure as full participation as possible in the voting franchise.
However, the actions of the Board in adopting a narrow cure policy that applies in such a way as to uphold voting deadlines and ensure secrecy in voting is maintained, but that allows electors the greatest possible chance of having their vote counted, does not violate either the Election Code or the Free and Equal clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Share your thoughts by scrolling down to leave a comment.
