Court Opinion

ID: 9753116
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 18:58:00.079267+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:27:30.108936
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen:
I cannot accede to the forced rationalization resorted to in the majority opinion, the Norwood Election Contest Case, 382 Pa. 547, 116 A. 2d 552 (1955), or any other “authority” which flies in the face of the clear mandate of the Act of 1959, P. L. 2142 at 2148, 25 P.S. §3063 (a) requiring that “Any ballot marked by any other mark than an (X) or check (sj) in the spaces provided for that purpose shall be void and not counted(Emphasis supplied).
The patent disregard of the legislative mandate by the courts is disruptive of the whole democratic process and shatters the delicate adjustment of checks and balances so important in our scheme of government. It is not important and of no great consequence that the government of the City of Reading may or may not be changed by the action of the majority — what is important and of great consequence is that our court has misread, misinterpreted and misapplied a clear legislative pronouncement. This is particularly true in the interpretation of the election laws which are basic to our democratic system. Hence, I am impelled to follow what Chief Justice Jones said in Weber Appeal, 399 Pa. 37, 44, 159 A. 2d 901, as recently as 1960: “The technicalities of the Election Law (and they are many) *69are necessary for the preservation of the secrecy and purity of the ballot and must, therefore, be meticulously observed.”
I dissent.