Almost six months after the Nov. 3, 2020 election, the Supreme Court still refused to hear a case about a Pennsylvania voting dispute.

On Monday, April 19, the court dismissed an appeal from a Republican congressional candidate’s challenge to the state’s mail-in ballot measures.

The Supreme Court wrote in an order: “The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.”

The ruling is the Supreme Court’s latest rejection of a slew of election cases filed before and after former President Donald Trump and his Republican allies tried to overturn the 2020 election results.

The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint by Republican congressional candidate Jim Bognet and four Republican voters on Monday. In their suit, they questioned the Pennsylvania secretary of state’s decision to extend the deadline for receiving mail ballots by three days despite the Postal Service’s warnings that delivery would be late.

The Republicans claimed that only the legislature could make such a change, but the Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismissed their argument. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit refused to decide otherwise with “no explanation and no noted dissents,” according to NBC News.

“This case presents an opportunity for the court to resolve these issues in an orderly manner on full briefing and argument, rather than on the ‘shadow docket’ under the time pressures of an ongoing election,” Bognet’s lawyer, David Thompson, said in court records. 

Thompson then said that the state Supreme Court “rewrote” election deadlines, claiming that the Constitution grants federal election rules to “state legislatures” rather than “state judges.”

“Although Election Day has passed, the disputes around these questions are not going away,” Thompson stated. “This Court’s intervention is needed to resolve splits in the lower courts. Federal courts of appeals have reached directly contrary holdings for which parties have standing to bring claims under the Elections.”

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s counsel, Robert Wiygul, advised the Supreme Court that they should not interfere in the case, pointing out that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court intervened during the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Virus pandemic and USPS delays. 

In addition to Pennsylvania, the Wisconsin Elections Commission was also accused of unconstitutionally extending absentee voting due to the CCP Virus pandemic.

Former President Donald Trump claimed that Wisconsin election officials had violated state law by setting up “unauthorized, illegal” absentee voting drop boxes and permitting poll workers to correct absentee ballot witness certificates.

Trump believed the lawsuit was essential to continue because it might help prevent history from repeating in the future.

“The narrow window in which legal disputes may be resolved following a presidential election weighs heavily in favor of applying the ‘capable of repetition’ doctrine to resolve issues capable of reoccurring. Otherwise, non-legislative state actors may be emboldened in future presidential elections to make even more last-minute changes to state election laws contrary to the elector’s clause,” Trump’s legal team said in court documents obtained by Fox News.