[j.havenfarm]

Hmmm. Eastman is the author of the fairy tail that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 allowed the VP to reject the electoral result. That said, that’s First Amendment protected and I dont think that he should face any consequence at all.

That said, abused as it is, here we either believe in federalism or not. The federal government is not supposed to be the babysitter of the states. “Federal sanction” Huh? What does that even mean?

[Alberta's Child]

Many lawyers destroyed their credibility in my book when they took public positions about the 2016 and 2020 elections that completely contradicted each other. Mark Levin is one example of this.

I’m not sure if Eastman falls into this category, but it would be both pathetic and comical if an opposing counsel in one of his 2020 cases filed a legal brief or article he wrote in 2016 to undermine his credibility.

[P-Marlowe]

Eastman is the author of the fairy tail that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 allowed the VP to reject the electoral result.

Why did congress feel the need to amend it if Eastman’s position was clearly in error?

[DiogenesLamp]

Hmmm. Eastman is the author of the fairy tail that the Electoral Count Act of 1887 allowed the VP to reject the electoral result.

The US Constitution requires legislatures to submit the electoral votes. The Executive branch has no constitutional authority to "certify" anything.

The VP should have thrown the election to the house. It was his constitutional duty to do so because the electors were not submitted by the legislatures.

[ifinnegan]

You’re a fairy tale.