Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cicero

IMO, the issue is not ripe until AFTER the Electoral College votes on Dec 15. I get that from the specific wording in the 20th Amendment, “if the President elect shall have failed to qualify”. The ‘winner’ isn’t President elect until the EC votes.

If that’s true, then maybe Scalia was the No vote. IMO, he’s the the top Constitutional scholar on the Court. If the USSC were to rule before that, THEN we’d have a real Constitutional crisis, because we’d have no President after 1/19/09, and no proscribed way to get one. Too many electors are bound by State law to vote for Obama, who would be ineligible.

IMO. Add $4.75 to that, and you might get a Cappuccino at Starbucks or some such place. ;-)


47 posted on 12/08/2008 12:10:27 PM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: savedbygrace

I might not be following you. My take is that: If the electors vote as instructed by the voters for Obama-Biden, and then Obama is disqualified, we get President Biden. But if this were to go down before Dec. 15, the electors would still be who they are and would get to vote for anyone, which would send the whole mess to the House and Senate for lack of a majority unless someone got to 270.


55 posted on 12/08/2008 12:16:47 PM PST by Genoa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: savedbygrace

I might be over-analyzing. I think more than 270 Obama electors are required by State law in each State to vote for Obama. IOW, they have to vote for him even though he would be ineligible. A conundrum.

On 3rd thought, in that case, we’d probably have Acting President Biden.


71 posted on 12/08/2008 12:29:58 PM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: savedbygrace
THANKS! I had missed the exact wording in the 20th amendment. "If the President elect shall have failed to qualify”. It makes a lot of sense that the SCOTUS wouldn't rule until after the Electoral College meets. BTW, I love your screenname.
127 posted on 12/08/2008 2:05:06 PM PST by Former Fetus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson