宾夕法尼亚最高法院周一发表了意见驳回五起诉讼由特朗普竞选团队提交旨在使无效在2020年总统竞选中，有8329张选票投给了技术问题。

三名法官以多数写道，在审查选票时，“没有欺诈或非法的指控”。

“未能在外信封背面的选民声明中包括手写的姓名、地址或日期，虽然构成了对《选举法》的技术违反，但并不保证成千上万宾夕法尼亚州选民的选举权被全面剥夺，”克里斯蒂娜·多诺霍法官为大多数人写道。

另外两名法官加入了多诺霍，而法院的其他成员发表了不同的意见。在另一份意见中，大法官大卫·韦希特(David N. Wecht)写道，虽然他同意今年应该计算技术上有缺陷的选票，但他不认为申报上没有日期“应该被视为‘轻微违规’。”"

玛丽·阿尔塔弗/美联社

市政工作人员从信封中取出卢泽恩县的选票，星期三，2020年11月4日

微信写道，“在未来的选举中，我会将日期和签名要求视为强制性的...任何一项的遗漏都不足以使有关的投票无效。”

微信以“希望大会认为今后适合完善和澄清《选举法》”来结束其赞同和反对意见。

在第二份同意的反对意见中，大法官凯文·多尔蒂(Kevin M. Dougherty)在首席大法官托马斯·G·塞勒(Thomas G. Saylor)和大法官莎莉·厄普代克·蒙迪(Sallie Updyke)的参与下写道，大法官同意今年应计算有缺陷的选票，并且不应因技术故障而使缺少“填写”信息(如打印的姓名或地址)的选票无效。然而，多尔蒂法官指出，“立法机关包括的术语“日期”和“标志”是不言而喻的”，他们“不认为没有日期只是我们可能忽略的技术不足。”

法院还对阿勒格尼县一名共和党州参议院候选人对2349张选票的类似、单独的质疑做出了裁决。法院也驳回了这一请求。

Trump campaign loses 5 more cases in Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court Monday issued opinionsrejecting five lawsuitsfiled by the Trump campaignaimed at invalidating8,329 ballots cast in the 2020 presidential contest over technical concerns.

Three justices wrote in the majority that, "no allegations of fraud or illegality" came up in examination of the ballots.

"Failures to include a handwritten name, address or date in the voter declaration on the back of the outer envelope, while constituting technical violations of the Election Code, do not warrant the wholesale disenfranchisement of thousands of Pennsylvania voters," Justice Christine L. Donohue wrote for the majority.

Two other justices joined Donohue, while other members of the court issued separate opinions. In one separate opinion, Justice David N. Wecht wrote that while he agrees technically deficient ballots should be counted this year, he does not believe the absence of a date on the declaration "should be overlooked as a 'minor irregularity.'"

Wecht wrote, "in future elections, I would treat the date and sign requirement as mandatory ... with the omission of either item sufficient without more to invalidate the ballot in question."

Wecht concluded his concurring and dissenting opinion with the "hope that the General Assembly sees fit to refine and clarify the Election Code" in the future.

In a second concurring, dissenting opinion, Justice Kevin M. Dougherty, joined by Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor and Justice Sallie Updyke Mundy, wrote that the justices agreed the deficient ballots should be counted this year and that ballots missing "fill out" information, such as printed name or address, should not be voided due to technical faults. However, Justice Dougherty noted that "the terms "date" and "sign" -- which were included by the legislature -- are self-evident," and that they "do not view the absence of a date as a mere technical insufficiency we may overlook."

The court also ruled on a similar, separate challenge by a Republican candidate for state senate in Allegheny County contesting 2,349 ballots. The court denied that request as well.