“and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. “
Exactly where in there does it say that if there are electoral votes for somebody that Congress doesn’t think is eligible they can just reject those votes?
What part of “No electoral vote...shall be rejected” don’t you understand?
Random items --
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor
Instantiates Congress power to disqualify.
AMENDMENT XXVII Originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992. No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened.
Not only did the President not have the power to change Congresses compensation (I.E like Obamacare waiver) it's also verifiably unconstitutional. So, birthers, drop the case that will *never* *ever* go anywhere other than the national enquirer and work on something that is plain as day.