If Hoffman was declared the winner and was certified as such by New York State, he would present his credentials to the House and formally contest the election. Under the Constitution, the House is the sole judge of the qualifications, elections and returns of its members, and would be able to exclude (not expel) Owens by a simple majority vote if they rule Hoffman to be the winner (as opposed to expulsion, which requires a 2/3 vote and does not have to be for reasons of constitutional qualifications or election results). It was fairly common practice in the 19th century for the House to seat someone that presented his credentials, and months later excluded him after a contest from the candidate that had been originally deemed to have lost.
But 3,000 votes is a lot of votes to make up, and I don’t think Hoffman can win if reports of only 10,000 or so absentees being outstanding are correct.
Good information. I was inclined to believe it was some kind of vote. Of course, this begs the question, should Hoffman pull-off the miraculous, how would the Dem controlled House vote? Would they set aside partisanship and do the right thing, or would they do what was best for them alone?
Ping to this post. It explains in detail what the mechanics would be for removing Owens and seating Hoffman.
I believe several congressman have been unseated midterm in the past, not just excluded.
But it’s all academic in this case cause the rat house would side with Owens no matter what.