SD45: Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Brewster

It appears the final race of 2020 in Pennsylvania has come to a close. 

On Tuesday morning, United State District Judge Nicholas Ranjan ruled against Repubilcan Nicole Ziccarelli’s challenge of a batch of mail-in ballots, which ultimately cements state Sen. Jim Brewster’s (D-Allegheny) 69 vote victory. 

Ranjan, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, wrote that Ziccarelli’s challenge failed on “the merits.” 

 


One week ago, chaos ensued at the state capitol when Senate Republicans refused to swear-in Brewster, citing the ongoing legal battle. The Department of State certified Brewster’s victory in mid-December. 

On Friday, Senate President Pro Tempore Jake Corman (R-Centre) wrote in a tweet that if the federal court rules that the ballots should count, the Senate would seat Brewster “immediately.” 

 


Gov. Tom Wolf and Senate Democrats have called for Brewster sworn-in since the ruling. Corman wrote in a tweet that Brewster will be sworn-in on Wednesday morning.

January 12th, 2021 | Posted in Front Page Stories, Harrisburg, Top Stories | 8 Comments

8 thoughts on “SD45: Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Brewster”

  1. jjcnpa says:

    The seditionists lost again

  2. gulagpittsburgh says:

    Justice prevailed. Now let’s see if Corman lives up to his word. GOP are not known for truth, honesty or integrity.

    1. Huh says:

      He said he would. He said it publicly. They never said they wouldn’t seat Brewster, only that they were waiting for the court challenge to be resolved.

      Why is that so crazy when dealing with an election margin of 60some votes?

      1. Thomas Paine says:

        Because there was no merit to the case.This was noted by a Trump appointed Judge. The Republican Senate knew that the federal courts will not overrule the Pa Supreme Court on this matter. All courts–state or federal–don’t want to uncount votes. Our politics have gotten so partisan that silly cases like this one happen clogging up valuable court time.

        1. Huh says:

          Just to clarify, because they could guess which way it was going to break – and I believe they did- you think it was a hyper partisan slight to offend Brewster for no reason?

          Its not possible they were just erring on the side of caution?

          1. Jared says:

            Yes because what real consequences is corman and the gop going to suffer. None, so they risk nothing and get to play big swinging dick and act tough

    2. Daniel Danielson says:

      When Democrats challenge election results, they are fighting to preserve the Republic. When Republicans challenge election results, they are trying to steal elections and posing a threat to the entire system…

      Am I doing this right?

      1. Pam says:

        Good faith is the difference but you aren’t arguing from a position of good faith so we’ll continue to watch judges rule on the merits. Like Bush/Gore. Remember that? It goes both ways but one party never attacked the Capitol. They knitted pink hats and peacefully protested when Trump won. You just don’t have a good faith position this time around. Just a lot of loud liars.

Comments are closed.