Appeals court bars Pennsylvania from tossing mail ballots over handwritten dates

A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that Pennsylvania cannot constitutionally disqualify mail-in ballots solely because a voter did not write an accurate date on the ballot return envelope, ordering state election officials to stop the practice.

The unanimous three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling by a federal judge in Pittsburgh and said in a 55-page opinion that the state’s interest in discarding such ballots did not outweigh the constitutional right to vote. The panel wrote that it was “unable to justify” a practice that had resulted in the disqualification of thousands of presumably valid ballots.

Pennsylvania law requires voters to write the date on the outer envelope used to return a mail ballot. Election officials in some counties have been rejecting ballots when the date was missing, illegible or incorrect, a practice plaintiffs said led to the needless disenfranchisement of many voters. The appeals court said that, when balanced against the burden on voters’ constitutional rights, the state’s stated interests did not justify wholesale disqualification for such technical defects.

The dispute reached the 3rd Circuit after a federal judge in Pittsburgh issued a ruling earlier this year enjoining the state from discarding ballots for that reason. The appeals court affirmed that injunction, making the prohibition effective across the circuit while the litigation proceeds.

The court did not eliminate all grounds for rejecting mail ballots. Its decision addressed only the specific practice of disqualifying ballots solely because of an inaccurate or missing handwritten date on the return envelope. Election officials retain authority to reject ballots that fail other legal requirements or that present evidence of ineligibility or fraud.

The decision comes in a state that frequently plays a decisive role in presidential elections and where mail voting has been the subject of partisan disputes and litigation in recent years. Lawyers for voting rights groups argued that the date requirement is a technicality that disproportionately disenfranchises eligible voters and that officials could verify voter identity and eligibility through other means.

State attorneys general and county election officials have defended the rule as part of statutory safeguards intended to preserve ballot integrity. The appeals court opinion examined those interests and concluded they did not justify the automatic disqualification of ballots that otherwise appeared to be properly cast.

The ruling allows affected ballots to be counted going forward unless another valid legal basis exists for rejecting them. The Commonwealth may seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court, as is customary in high-profile election cases, although the appeals court’s order currently governs procedures within the 3rd Circuit.

Legal observers said the case highlights ongoing tensions between rules designed to ensure orderly elections and judicial efforts to protect access to the ballot. The appeals court’s decision will likely influence how Pennsylvania election officials handle returned mail ballots and could affect procedures in future elections where similar technical requirements exist.

The litigation is part of a broader pattern of court challenges over mail voting rules that states and localities have adopted or enforced in recent election cycles. For voters and election administrators in Pennsylvania, the ruling clarifies that missing or incorrect handwritten dates on return envelopes alone are not a constitutionally permissible basis for discarding ballots.