DELAWARE- Jane Brady and Julianne Murray represented the plaintiffs in the case who complained the passing of no excuse mail in voting was unconstitutional.
A Chancery Court vice chancellor agreed to the delight of Brady who says the general assembly didn't do its job.
"You have to amend the constitution," Brady said. "The general assembly didn't do that. They passed a bill that only required a simple majority because they couldn't get the votes to amend the constitution the way they wanted."
Mike Brickner of the ACLU of Delaware disagrees with the ruling and he hopes this can be reviewed and possibly appealed in the state supreme court.
"If they do, they have the ability to stay the lower court's decision and could allow vote by mail to continue to be used for the general election and we think that's the prudent thing to do," Brickner said.
Julianne Murray was the attorney for three plaintiffs and is also running for Attorney General in November. She says there was no political motive and that she was strictly a lawyer in the proceedings.
"In my suit, I represented a Republican, a Democrat, and an unaffiliated from New Castle, Kent, and Sussex," Murray said. "It's as apolitical as you can possibly get. It's very narrow. I don't have a problem with vote by mail. I have a problem with not following the constitution."
Brickner believes the general assembly's process was constitutional
"The Delaware state constitution says that the legislature has the sole discretion to be able to determine the means by how people cast their ballot," Brickner said.
The fate of the law may not be sealed yet, leaving an opening for no excuse mail-in voting to come back ahead of November's election.