By Robert Willmann
The request for a stay order or injunction against Pennsylvania in the solid case to declare unconstitutional the changes in 2019 that established full mail-in voting in that state was denied by the U.S. Supreme Court in a standard one-sentence order on Tuesday, 8 December 2020 . Sometimes the Supreme Court will consider an application for an injunction or stay order as also being a request to agree to hear the case, and will accept the case for decision and set a briefing schedule. Or they may accept the case and grant relief without further briefing or argument. In this instance, the lawyer filing the request, Greg Teufel of Pittsburgh, also asked that the court consider the application in that vein: the court could use it to agree to hear the case. However, the court's order denied injunctive relief, and did not explicitly say that it was also denying a request to consider the case as a whole.
It is my understanding that a formal request asking the court to agree to hear the case on its merits will be filed.
The case was brought in Pennsylvania by U.S. Congressman Mike Kelly, candidate Sean Parnell, and six others. After the courageous Judge Patricia McCullough of the Commonwealth Court issued a preliminary injunction against certifying the election results pending an evidentiary hearing, the intellectually corrupt Pennsylvania Supreme Court stepped in and dismissed the case with prejudice, so that the constitutional issue could not be decided and the case could not be re-filed in Pennsylvania .
 The U.S. Supreme Court order denying a stay order or injunction.