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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

BGBD

(3,282 posts)
20. It does
Mon Jul 6, 2020, 12:31 PM
Jul 2020

There is nothing in the constitution that says a state can't decide electors based on the national popular vote. The constitution does not reserve that power to the federal government, it clearly gives it to the states. Therefore, no elector can argue that it is unconstitutional for a state to either require that they cast their electors vote for the national vote winner or be removed from as an elector is they refuse to do so. It takes away one of the clear arguments that would have been made against these laws.

The only constitutional argument is related to interstate agreements, which as I mentioned before, wouldn't stop the same individual states of each passing a version of the law that doesn't mention or rely on any agreement with the other states.

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 #20