[
]
Washington:
With just four days left until Election Day, former President Donald Trump’s baseless claims of voter fraud in Pennsylvania have raised concerns that he may attempt to overturn the vote, not just in Pennsylvania but also in other crucial battleground states.
Trump’s rhetoric has sparked fears of violence and attempts to disrupt the electoral process, similar to the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack.
Trump’s claims have raised concerns that he is preparing to blame a potential loss in Pennsylvania on voter fraud. His social media post on Thursday stated, “We caught them CHEATING BIG in Pennsylvania,” and demanded criminal prosecutions. A senior Harris campaign official countered that Trump’s claims are an attempt to “sow doubt in our elections and institutions when he’s afraid he can’t win.”
Kyle Miller, a Pennsylvania policy strategist, warns that Trump’s actions are “sowing the seeds for attempts to overturn an election result that cuts against Donald Trump.” Miller believes that Trump and his allies have learned from their 2020 experience, realizing they need to spread these ideas early.
Trump recently intensified his unfounded allegations, claiming probes into suspect voter registration forms are proof of voter fraud. However, state officials and democracy advocates argue that these incidents demonstrate the system working as intended.
A judge extended the mail-in ballot deadline in Bucks County after Trump’s campaign sued, and investigations into potentially fraudulent registrations in Lancaster and York counties have found no evidence of illegal voting.
The US electoral system, rooted in the 1789 Constitution, provides opportunities for Trump and his supporters to challenge or delay election results. In 2020, Trump’s team attempted 60 court cases alleging fraud, all unsuccessful. However, this experience has prepared lawyers on both sides for another potential dispute.
Should Trump’s followers manage to overturn or delay unfavourable state results through the courts or legislative obstruction, they could potentially prevent a duly elected Harris from taking office and sway the result in Trump’s favor. Some states have warned local officials not to intervene illegally or refuse to certify results. Ultimately, the nine-member US Supreme Court, with six conservative justices, three appointed by Trump, would be the final arbiter in such a case.
