Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FBaggins

(26,714 posts)
18. It does not appear to do so
Mon Jul 6, 2020, 01:10 PM
Jul 2020

The holding is simply that states have the power to enforce the state's voters' choice for President. It does not say/hint that states have the power to enforce a choice by voters outside the state.

The States have devised mechanisms to ensure that the electors they appoint vote for the presidential candidate their citizens have preferred



The decision holds that states have complete power to choose how their electors are decided, so long as the Constitution doesn't otherwise exclude that power. So, if a state has a law saying the state will choose electors based on the winner of the national popular vote, this decision holds that the electors must vote for that person or they can be removed.

Sorry. The second sentence is not supported by the first. The argument against NPV is precisely that Constitution does otherwise exclude that power. Nothing in this ruling weakens that argument. It says only that this power does extend to requiring them to vote for the selection made by that state's voters.

I know conservatives are crowing about this, although a faithless elector has never actually hurt them, but it's a win for us.

I haven't seen the crowing... but I suspect it'd mostly because this position (below) was unanimously proven wrongheaded. I don't think that's a conservative victory. There were plenty of DUers who also recognized that the "electors can vote for whomever they want" position was nonsense.

&feature=emb_logo
I thought they didn't want to touch elections with a ten foot pole /nt bucolic_frolic Jul 2020 #1
Copy of the Court's 9-0 opinion (.pdf).... PoliticAverse Jul 2020 #2
States have a lot of leeway in handling their electors. Kaleva Jul 2020 #3
"States May Require" jayfish Jul 2020 #4
There is no constitutional requirement that mandates a state's electors vote for the winner. Kaleva Jul 2020 #5
No, but there are state laws with penalties nt Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #8
If the penalty is financial, then elected offices are up for auction lindysalsagal Jul 2020 #14
They either do, or they don't. not_the_one Jul 2020 #9
The "electoral college" doesn't say anything FBaggins Jul 2020 #12
Precisely. Igel Jul 2020 #27
... There has until now been no such stipulation, Ghost Dog Jul 2020 #6
Here is the list of states that require electors to vote for the winner in their state Kaleva Jul 2020 #7
Thank you Ghost Dog Jul 2020 #30
The CT that has been posted over the weekend is that Trump will challenge the popular vote Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #10
It isn't up to the legislature to certify the electors in several swing states. Kaleva Jul 2020 #16
That's my point - the CT doesn't take that fact into consideration Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #19
My hope is AC_Mem Jul 2020 #25
The only reason he wants to win is to avoid jail and the label of "loser" nt Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #26
This is good for us. BGBD Jul 2020 #11
This doesn't impact the constitutionality (or lack thereof) of the consortium FBaggins Jul 2020 #13
It goes beyond that BGBD Jul 2020 #15
It does not appear to do so FBaggins Jul 2020 #18
It does BGBD Jul 2020 #20
Nope FBaggins Jul 2020 #22
Wrong BGBD Jul 2020 #24
Two of the most important people, Madison and Hamilton, who devised the Electoral College marie999 Jul 2020 #17
Hamilton and Madison BGBD Jul 2020 #21
'The court said states may require members of the Electoral College to vote elleng Jul 2020 #23
So what happens if an elector votes "against" her state's choice? JustABozoOnThisBus Jul 2020 #28
This Wikipedia page has an excellent list of all past faithless electors... PoliticAverse Jul 2020 #29
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court says states...»Reply #18