A year ago, Emil Bove was a simple defense lawyer for presidential candidate Donald Trump. He had represented him throughout the Manhattan criminal trial that led to his client’s conviction, and worked on both federal cases against the then-former president.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
The appeals court said in its opinion that Bove would file his own dissenting opinion at a later date. Friday, it happened. It offers a glimpse into the beginning of Bove’s new career as an appellate judge.
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
On Friday, he went out of his way to issue a 20-page order in an election case that the court decided nearly two weeks ago. On October 14, the Third Circuit denied a new full hearing that the RNC had requested following an August ruling. In that case, the panel upheld a lower court ruling requiring Pennsylvania to count undated or incorrectly dated ballots, ruling that earlier guidelines to toss ballots containing those errors violated the Constitution. These ballots are often hotly contested in Pennsylvania elections, with Republicans seeking to limit the criteria for accepting mail-in ballots and Democrats attempting to broaden them.
The appeals court said in its opinion that Bove would file his own dissenting opinion at a later date. Friday, it happened. It offers a glimpse into the beginning of Bove’s new career as an appellate judge.
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
Today, all these triangulations, all these upheavals of norms and all these efforts to play the innocent in the face of this have borne fruit. Bove holds the rarefied role of federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
On Friday, he went out of his way to issue a 20-page order in an election case that the court decided nearly two weeks ago. On October 14, the Third Circuit denied a new full hearing that the RNC had requested following an August ruling. In that case, the panel upheld a lower court ruling requiring Pennsylvania to count undated or incorrectly dated ballots, ruling that earlier guidelines to toss ballots containing those errors violated the Constitution. These ballots are often hotly contested in Pennsylvania elections, with Republicans seeking to limit the criteria for accepting mail-in ballots and Democrats attempting to broaden them.
The appeals court said in its opinion that Bove would file his own dissenting opinion at a later date. Friday, it happened. It offers a glimpse into the beginning of Bove’s new career as an appellate judge.
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
After Trump’s victory, Bove became the president’s personal henchman at the DOJ. He spearheaded the bizarre attempt to turn the Eric Adams corruption case into a way to secure loyalty to the president’s immigration policies, and reportedly pushed to defy the courts in referrals to El Salvador’s CECOT prison under the Alien Enemies Act.
Today, all these triangulations, all these upheavals of norms and all these efforts to play the innocent in the face of this have borne fruit. Bove holds the rarefied role of federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
On Friday, he went out of his way to issue a 20-page order in an election case that the court decided nearly two weeks ago. On October 14, the Third Circuit denied a new full hearing that the RNC had requested following an August ruling. In that case, the panel upheld a lower court ruling requiring Pennsylvania to count undated or incorrectly dated ballots, ruling that earlier guidelines to toss ballots containing those errors violated the Constitution. These ballots are often hotly contested in Pennsylvania elections, with Republicans seeking to limit the criteria for accepting mail-in ballots and Democrats attempting to broaden them.
The appeals court said in its opinion that Bove would file his own dissenting opinion at a later date. Friday, it happened. It offers a glimpse into the beginning of Bove’s new career as an appellate judge.
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
After Trump’s victory, Bove became the president’s personal henchman at the DOJ. He spearheaded the bizarre attempt to turn the Eric Adams corruption case into a way to secure loyalty to the president’s immigration policies, and reportedly pushed to defy the courts in referrals to El Salvador’s CECOT prison under the Alien Enemies Act.
Today, all these triangulations, all these upheavals of norms and all these efforts to play the innocent in the face of this have borne fruit. Bove holds the rarefied role of federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
On Friday, he went out of his way to issue a 20-page order in an election case that the court decided nearly two weeks ago. On October 14, the Third Circuit denied a new full hearing that the RNC had requested following an August ruling. In that case, the panel upheld a lower court ruling requiring Pennsylvania to count undated or incorrectly dated ballots, ruling that earlier guidelines to toss ballots containing those errors violated the Constitution. These ballots are often hotly contested in Pennsylvania elections, with Republicans seeking to limit the criteria for accepting mail-in ballots and Democrats attempting to broaden them.
The appeals court said in its opinion that Bove would file his own dissenting opinion at a later date. Friday, it happened. It offers a glimpse into the beginning of Bove’s new career as an appellate judge.
He argued in his 20-page dissent that the dating requirements in question were so minimal as to constitute a “nonexistent” burden.
“At issue here is Pennsylvania’s requirement that voters write the date next to their signature on a declaration when transmitting an absentee ballot,” the notice states. “For a voter with a working pen, sufficient ink and average manual dexterity, it should take less than five seconds.”
The case began as a challenge, filed in 2022 by Pennsylvania Democrats, to Pennsylvania state instructions issued to county election boards. The instructions required boards to ignore absentee ballots that were cast on time but were missing a date or contained an incorrect date on the outer envelopes.
A lower court judge did not rule until March 2025, finding the requirements unconstitutional.
Bove rejected the court’s role in the case, saying the lower court added to “the existing uncertainty already facing Pennsylvania officials preparing to administer
elections on November 4, 2025, as well as in the upcoming midterm congressional elections.
year.” It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will take up the matter and overturn the decision, he added.
To do otherwise, he writes, would be to allow an opinion to persist that “may lead to an undemocratic takeover of politically responsible representatives of the people.”
Back to top button
.png?w=390&resize=390,220&ssl=1 "Lies, damned lies and working statistics of the Trump era")
