Who needs Congress and state legislatures when activist judges can just change the law as they see fit

Judges DO NOT have the authority to change laws as they see fit.

A federal judge in Wisconsin has extended the deadline to submit an absentee ballot for the upcoming 2020 election to Nov. 9, so long as the ballot is mailed and postmarked on or before Nov. 3.

Congress has set the first tuesday in November as the day for federal election. That would be Nov. 2 2020. How can a judge change election day to Nov. 3rd?

The order also extends the voter registration deadline to Oct. 21

Screw whatever is in Wisconsin law as passed by their legislature and signed by the governor. This judge can change state law with his own pen!

In addition, poll workers in the state will be allowed to work in any county rather than just where they reside.

If state law says they can only be a pol worker in the county they reside, by what authority does the judge change state law to anyplace in the state?

Under current law, the deadline for returning an absentee ballot to have it counted is 8 p.m. on Election Day.

Law says absentee ballots have to be in and counted by 8pm election day. What did the judge change the law to?

A federal judge in Wisconsin has extended the deadline to submit an absentee ballot for the upcoming 2020 election to Nov. 9,

This is judicial activism in full force. NO judge has the authority or the right to change state law. Appeals court should smack this judge into last year when they strike his ruling!

How does that change the law?

If the law says mail ballots need to be counted by 8pm election day . . . how can the judge void that and say the deadline is 7 days after that?

He is changing the law.
I’ll ask again. under what authority does the judge have the right to change or extend what is written into law? That is the sole authority of the state legislature (and congress on extending election day to the first wednesday).

I have seen multiple times where a judge has extended poll times because they ran out of ballots or had broken machines. However I don’t think that it was ever mentioned if they were state or federal judges.
It seems strange that all of the states make their own election laws. So it does seem strange that a federal judge can make changes.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965, duly enacted by Congress, gives Federal Judges plenary power to ensure the right to vote is protected. If they feel the right to vote is being infringed, they can pretty much override any State law or regulation as necessary to secure the right to vote.


So literally the exact opposite of judicial activism? Green light directly from Congress to do this?

Sounds about right.

Wow. We don’t need state legislators. Federal judges can do it all!

I don’t agree. no place in the federal constitution is that power gvranted. If the law infringes on a constitutional right, thenv strike it down as unconstitutional.

1 Like

No, the framers decided we need a supremacy clause.

Nowhere is what power granted?

Also, we definitely still need state legislators to pass bathroom gender bills. Don’t forget about that important function.

Sure. Supremacy would be if congress passed a law that said states must allow 7 days after the election for ballots to arrive.

Giving judges authority to grant random and u specified changes to election laws? That violates states rights where congress has left it up to the states to set election laws.

I think you might want to check your calendar. Nov. 3rd is Election day, not the 2nd.

And the judge hasn’t changing the law. He has issued a court order.


Congress made a choice between two possible evils with the Voting Rights Act.

Evil #1. A Judge being heavy handed in how he handles election cases.

Evil #2. A State or locality being able to get away with infringing the right to vote because a Judge did not have sufficient authority to stop it.

Congress went with #1. Judges may act more heavy handed than what is needed. But that evil is tolerated in the much greater interest of stopping the much greater evil of voting rights violations.

In this case, I don’t think the Judge did more than what he felt was necessary to secure the right to vote.

1 Like

…and remove them from the bench. Maybe other judges would then stop this activism?

maybe on one count, but the vra gives them exactly zero authority to change election day, that is set in the constitution by the congress. not the states.

November 3rd of 2020 IS the first Tuesday in November of this year. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:



Activist judges don’t care a fig about the constitution. They rule based on their own biased feelings and politics.

They are a blight upon America.

He didn’t change Election Day…the OPer was incorrect. The first Tuesday in November is the 3rd, not the 2nd.

They have been empowered by CONGRESS to do so. It’s no different than federal marshals enforcing the law.

They are NOT activist judges if CONGRESS has directed them to do this. Activist judges take it on themselves to make laws. This judge is performing their role based on a law passed in 1965.