The Constitution does not require a state’s electors, regardless of party, to choose a candidate based on the popular vote. States have passed laws to prevent these defections. Defectors are challenging the laws as are folks hoping to scrap the electoral college. SCOTUS is taking a look.
Related: Did The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Just Save the Electoral College From Meddling Democrats?
In fact, 2016 marked the largest number of faithless voters — a total of seven who cast votes for candidates they were not pledged to support. States have tried to prevent such “faithless elector” votes by enacting laws to remove them or fine them or both. Now, just as the presidential campaign is heating up, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear challenges to such state laws in Washington and Colorado.
The Left thinks the Electoral College is broken because it does not reflect the popular vote. Seriously? That’s precisely why we have it. To prevent mob rule. So that large urban areas do not set policy for a majority rural nation.
But that’s not even the question. The matter is whether the constitution allows the States to make laws requiring electors to do what the Constitution did not. Use the popular vote to pick a president?
National Popular Vote (NPV) is working hard to undermine the Republic. Their goal is to elect by popular vote. If the US Supreme Court rules that electors have supremacy in the matter, what does that mean for their movement?
I have no idea. I have posited in the past that this would undermine NPV’s entire exercise.
It turns out that no state can force an elector to vote for whom they say. No matter how many agreements they pass or sign. Because of the Constitution!
Momma’s-basement-dwelling mustache-twirling villains shout curses!
That was after the 10th Circuit ruling, which brings us back to the SCOTUS hearing. The case will be heard, and we’ll have to wait and see, but we’ll try to keep you up to date. But I’m hopeful the Constitution speaks loudly to a majority.
Our Republic depends on it.
| NHPR
