By admitting that the postmark date is a reflection of processing capability rather than voter action, the USPS has undermined the legal standard used in Pennsy

By admitting that the postmark date is a reflection of processing capability rather than voter action, the USPS has undermined the legal standard used in Pennsylvania and other states to determine the validity of late-arriving ballots. This reinforces the argument that mass mail-in voting relies on a logistical system that the USPS itself admits is not "perfectly reliable" for dating time-sensitive documents. In states that require a postmark by Election Day to count a ballot received later, the operational reality of postmarking creates a chaotic environment where timely votes could be disqualified, or conversely, creates ambiguity about when a ballot actually entered the system. It is unreasonable to expect every mail-in voter to stand in line at a post office to get a manual stamp to prove they voted on time. If the standard automated system cannot guarantee an accurate date, as this rule admits, then using that system for critical constitutional functions like voting is inherently flawed.