Replies

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 was always questionable in terms of its constitutionality anyway
/\

Says you.

Big whoop.

Same with the rest of your arguments.

Commie.

Here's a scenario I'll play out for you. For the sake of this discussion I'll ignore the fact that the allocation of electoral votes among the states has changed after the 2020 census.

1. Donald Trump wins the 2024 election by 304-227 electoral votes over Joe Biden (the same margin as his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton).

2. He wins Texas (36 electoral votes) and Florida (29 electoral votes) by 60%-40% margins in both states.

3. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi drum up a scheme to overturn the election results and keep Biden in the White House. They get the Senate and House to challenge these 65 electoral votes under the Electoral Count Act of 1887.

4. The plot is successful. The House and Senate both recognize the challenge to these electoral votes under the terms of the 1887 law, and in separate votes they give Joe Biden 65 of Trump's 304 electoral votes.

There's absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution that permits anything of this sort. In fact, the only role the Constitution gives to Congress is under the 12th Amendment -- when Congress selects the President and Vice President in cases where no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes.

I'm going to gently suggest that you turn off your TV and educate yourself a bit.