You're listening to the Judicial Watch weekly update with Tom Fitton.

Hey everyone, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here with our weekly update on social media. Thank you as always for joining us. So much happening just this week alone to brief you on. First up, the Supreme Court of the United States, there is an argument

set in a key Judicial Watch case, indeed in a historic Judicial Watch case concerning elections

and whether late ballots can be counted. The hearing has been set for March 23rd. Judicial Watch is taking the lead in challenging states that count ballots that arrive after election day.

Federal law sets election day. It's pretty simple.

And if your ballot gets late, it's too late to be counted.

But some states count late ballots or ballots that arrive late as long as two

weeks after Election Day in Illinois, where we've challenged that law. In California, it's seven days.

And in Mississippi, it's five days after Election Day. And there in Mississippi, the Fifth Circuit

Court of Appeals ruled that a lower

court dismissal of our challenge, and the RNC is also challenging it, we're representing

our lawyers are the Libertarian Party, that the court throwing out the case was wrong, that

it is unlawful to count ballots it contradicts

federal law that sets an election day so it's unlawful to count ballots that

arrive after election day it's pretty straightforward application of the law

otherwise it's meaningless if it's not if you can count for two weeks after

election day why not four weeks after election day, why not four weeks

after election day? Why not a year after election day? Why not up until the next election for all we

know? So certainly elections have to be meaningful need to have deadlines. And that's the case before

the Supreme Court. Now, upwards of 30 states allow the late counting of ballots.

The ballots that come in late are counted.

So this is a substantial issue before the court.

...