[BP2]

>>> SCOTUS has previously affirmed these laws as Constitutional ...

Actually, the sidebar on “Faithless Electors” here (http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/electoral-college3.htm) says:

It’s important to note, that although these states have created these laws, a large number of scholars believe that such state-level laws hold no true bearing and would not survive constitutional challenge.

[browardchad]

It’s important to note, that although these states have created these laws, a large number of scholars believe that such state-level laws hold no true bearing and would not survive constitutional challenge.

Thanks, BP2, that's the same link I posted Lmo56.  I'm still curious about Lmo56's assertion that "SCOTUS has previously affirmed these laws as Constitutional"

[editor-surveyor]

"It’s important to note, that although these states have created these laws, a large number of scholars believe that such state-level laws hold no true bearing and would not survive constitutional challenge."

No, actually its irrelevent to note that erroneous opinion. Each state's electors are chosen, and behave, as per state laws. Federal law cannot regulate how the states vote.