Posted on 12/09/2016 4:31:22 AM PST by billyboy15
Yeah, but what is gained by commitment by 12/13 is "merely" safe harbor. A decision can come later than that, it just loses "safe harbor." 3 USC 5.
Michigan has met this, but if it hadn't, all it means is that a later choice by electors of the state is not conclusive. "Conclusive" means beyond legal challenge and question even by Congress as it counts the electoral ballots.
If Michigan courts found a winner on 12/18, and that process was reasonably orderly, it is a slam dunk that Congress would accept the results even if a challenge was offered in Congress on the day of counting the electoral ballots.
Even 12/19 isn't carved into stone. see 3 USC 2
Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct.
Again, "safe harbor" is probably lost, and the value of "safe harbor" is going to vary depending on the circumstances involved in delay of decision.
Might be technically true, depending on what is meant by "appeal to the court." On wednesday this week she filed an application to file an appeal, and many people take that as an appeal in its own right. In other words, she already did appeal to them, but her appeal is "please take my case," not "this is why the court below is wrong and should be reversed."
Is the certification doc up on the MI secretary of state website?
There is supposedly a court hearing today in PA. Some areas in PA are recounting, mostly those in the Philly area.
More info:
Excellent—thanks!
Post with links to certs of ascertainment and more
Michigan Certificate of Ascertainment <- linkee-poo
Why do you suppose the Rep Electors have their names and addresses listed while all the other electors are listed by name only?
Thank you!
Either state law or whim of the composer. Alaska's Cert only lists names.
Man is she a loser, I guarantee you Hillary is behind this driving it, calling the shots, the thing is I don’t think anybody had really figured out why? Perhaps it’s merely to distract America from Trumps almost daily accomplishments even though he’s not President yet
MI Supreme Court is elected. Still non-leftist majority though.
IF any state doesn’t certify their votes, then that state’s EV votes will be subtracted from the total of 538.
That would proportionally change the number of EV votes needed to win. IF Michigan’s 16 EV votes (I THINK), then the new number needed would drop from 270 to 262. Trump STILL wins. Shrillary stays at 232.
However, the entire state’s voting population would be angry at Dems for years to come. Michigan could stay red for decades. “You erased out votes”.
WHAT 11-2-2016 results? The election was held on 11-8-2016 ......
Nevada has also gone nowhere regarding any vote changes worthwhile, however, it did bring to light the massive voter fraud in Clark County-—which many of us knew existed for years.
No state normally lists anything more than the names.
However, angry state officials have gone so far as to release the names, addresses, and the phone numbers of the electors.
IMO, Those officials should be dismissed-with prejudice.
Sorry, used the wrong calendar...
Nevertheless, the recent election results were certified by the MI BoCanvass.
And the board decided 3-1 to stop the recount.
......I’m not an attorney, so can you tell me if it helps that the Michigan Supreme Court smacked Jill Stein down today? One would hope so.
Yes, it does. They could have summarily denied her request to be heard without making a remark about it. Notice the MI SC order includes a dissent that would have given Stein a recount. The dissent does have a point, in that certain privileges are attached to obtaining a SMALL FARCTION of votes, and if a candidate is close to those threshholds in a contest, the exact count may make a difference in obtaining those privileges. 5% of the votes cast (nationawide) gives the privilege of the party being included in the state's next presidential primary, and federal public funding of a campaign turns on party popularity in past election contests, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.