1. Okay, so THIS is where the rubber meets the road. This is my response: just because some pro-Trump lawyer says that a state or local government agency went in and acted "crazy and chang[ed] whatever they want[ed]" doesn't mean it is true. We cannot accept their arguments at face value. They may actually be wrong about what it is they are arguing about. You take it for granted that if someone acting on Trump's behalf said a rule change violated the election statutes then that must necessarily be the case. And if you have an argument you want to make in this respect, then make it and PROVE it by citing the necessary authorities (PA statutes, PA constitution, U.S. Constitution, etc.) INSTEAD of waving your hands in the air and making funny faces at people (metaphorically, of course).
2. With respect to the state courts -- they
can change certain things about an election law statute -- within certain constraints (is it constitutional or not, is there some other overriding legal principle that is coming into conflict with the statute).
For example, let's look at what the PA Supreme Court said about the deadline extension in Sept of 2020:
Nevertheless, we find the Commonwealth Court’s rationale in In re: General Election-1985 germane to the current challenge to the application of the ballot received by deadline. In that case, the court recognized that, while neither the Constitution nor the Election Code specified “any procedure to follow when a natural disaster creates an emergency situation that interferes with an election,” courts could look to the direction of 25 P.S. § 3046. In re General Election-1985, 531 A.2d at 839. As noted, Section 3046 provides courts of common pleas the power, on the day of an election, to decide “matters pertaining to the election as may be necessary to carry out the intent” of the Election Code, which the Commonwealth Court properly deemed to include providing “an equal opportunity for all eligible electors to participate in the election process,” which in that case necessitated delaying the election during a flood.
We have no hesitation in concluding that the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic equates to a natural disaster. See Friends of Devito v. Wolf, 227 A.3d 872, 888 (Pa. 2020) (agreeing “that the COVID-19 pandemic qualifies as a ‘natural disaster’ under the Emergency Code”).
Under our Extraordinary Jurisdiction, this Court can and should act to extend the received-by deadline for mail-in ballots to prevent the disenfranchisement of voters. We have previously recognized that, in enforcing the Free and Equal Elections Clause, this “Court possesses broad authority to craft meaningful remedies when required.” League of Women Voters, 178 A.3d at 822 (citing PA. CONST., art. V, §§ 1, 2, 10; 42 Pa.C.S. § 726 (granting power to “enter a final order or otherwise cause right and justice to be done”)).
I suppose now you will try to argue how the PA Supreme Court is forbidden from reviewing statutes passed by the legislature, and then I'll point out how the PA Supreme Court has the power of judicial review within PA, and then you'll modify what you wrote and pretend you really meant to say something else....and on it goes.