Title : "The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..."
link : "The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..."
"The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..."
"... settling a disputed issue in advance of this fall’s election. Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court, and settled the disputed 'faithless elector' issue before it affected the coming presidential contest. The Washington state law at issue 'reflects a tradition more than two centuries old,' she wrote. 'In that practice, electors are not free agents; they are to vote for the candidate whom the state’s voters have chosen.' Lower courts had split on the issue, with one saying the Constitution forbids dictating how such officials cast their ballots."Robert Barnes reports (at WaPo).
ADDED: Here's what a wrote about the case — Chiafolo v. Washington — back in January:
Wow! The answer had better be that these laws are constitutional or all hell will break loose!Ha ha. Phew!
What if the electors have a constitutionally based power to make up their own minds and apply their personal judgment? It's one thing for them to think they might and to contemplate going off on their own and for some of them, occasionally, to do it. It would be quite another thing for the Supreme Court to enshrine this power in constitutional law, to specifically give the electors the go-ahead!
And how would we, the humble voters feel if we found out that we're not voting for Donald Trump or Biden/Sanders/Warren/Bloomberg but for some local character who's free to do what he/she thinks is best? There would be another dimension of analysis. Some person we haven't cared at all about will need to be scrutinized for iron-clad party fealty. Horrible!
On the other hand, for those who hate the Electoral College and have felt bad about the seeming impossibility of amending the Constitution to change it, the crazy chaos of constitutionally empowered electors could be horrible enough to push the states to ratify an abolition of the Electoral College.
Thus articles "The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..."
that is all articles "The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t..." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-supreme-court-ruled-unanimously.html
0 Response to ""The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that states may require presidential electors to support the winner of the popular vote and punish or replace those who don’t...""
Post a Comment