Skip to comments.
Supreme Court rules states can remove 'faithless electors'
The Hill ^
| July 6, 2020
| Harper Neidig
Posted on 07/06/2020 7:32:02 AM PDT by jazusamo
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can prohibit their Electoral College representatives from disregarding voters when casting their ballots in presidential elections.
The unanimous decision, arising out of a case from Washington state, essentially gives states the right to outlaw "faithless electors" who cast their votes for people other than those chosen by their voters.
"Nothing in the Constitution expressly prohibits States from taking away presidential electors voting discretion as Washington does," Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the majority decision.
--This breaking news report will be updated.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 9to0; constitution; constructionism; constructionist; electionfraud; electoralcollege; electors; elenakagan; faithlesselectors; judiciary; nationalpopularvote; npv; politicaljudiciary; scotus; supremecourt; supremes; theconstitution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-170 next last
1
posted on
07/06/2020 7:32:02 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
To: jazusamo
👍
2
posted on
07/06/2020 7:32:47 AM PDT
by
Road Warrior ‘04
(BOYCOTT The NFL & NASCAR! Molon Labe! Oathkeeper!)
To: jazusamo
Hypothetical fake problem. Who had standing to bring the suit?
3
posted on
07/06/2020 7:34:44 AM PDT
by
Eleutheria5
("SHUT UP!" he explained.)
To: jazusamo
unanimous decision.........9-0..................Left freaks out, in 5, 4, 3..................
4
posted on
07/06/2020 7:35:07 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(To a liberal, 9-11 was 'illegal fireworks activity'..........................)
To: jazusamo
Even the commies were afraid to go there. It would negate even having elections.
5
posted on
07/06/2020 7:36:01 AM PDT
by
jmaroneps37
(Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies)
To: jazusamo
Next we need them to forbid States demanding their electors ignore locally cast votes in favor of the national popular vote.
6
posted on
07/06/2020 7:36:21 AM PDT
by
Rurudyne
(Standup Philosopher)
To: Eleutheria5
7
posted on
07/06/2020 7:36:23 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(To a liberal, 9-11 was 'illegal fireworks activity'..........................)
To: jmaroneps37
Not necessarily. Remember their hots for giving all EC votes for the guy with the most votes nationally.
8
posted on
07/06/2020 7:38:22 AM PDT
by
Rurudyne
(Standup Philosopher)
To: Eleutheria5
Hypothetical fake problem. Who had standing to bring the suit?Three Washington State Electors who were each fined $1,000 for not voting as pledged.
9
posted on
07/06/2020 7:38:27 AM PDT
by
Repeal 16-17
(Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
To: Rurudyne
Agreed. That is one of the biggest electoral issues coming down the pipe.
I find the concept itself repugnant in its conception, besides being corrosive and destructive to the Republic.
10
posted on
07/06/2020 7:38:41 AM PDT
by
rlmorel
("Truth is Treason in the Empire of Lies"- George Orwell)
To: Rurudyne
11
posted on
07/06/2020 7:41:27 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(Have You Donated to Keep Free Republic Up and Running?)
To: jazusamo
12
posted on
07/06/2020 7:42:57 AM PDT
by
bigbob
(Trust Trump. Trust the Plan)
To: jazusamo
How does that work?
How does an elector prove faithlessness?
If electors prove faithlessness by their vote when the Electoral College votes, must there be a redo of the Electoral College vote and if so, how does that work?
If the Electors have to vote in line with the vote of their State, what’s the point of the Electoral college?
“(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...”
I didn’t see any more.
13
posted on
07/06/2020 7:43:23 AM PDT
by
KrisKrinkle
(Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
To: jazusamo
It costs MILLIONS, sometimes TENS Of MILLIONS to get cases to the level of a SCOTUS ruling.
Who funded this attempt at legalized treason?
14
posted on
07/06/2020 7:43:27 AM PDT
by
montag813
(Nonsenze)
To: jazusamo
15
posted on
07/06/2020 7:45:14 AM PDT
by
kabar
To: KrisKrinkle
They haven’t updated it yet.
16
posted on
07/06/2020 7:45:55 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(Have You Donated to Keep Free Republic Up and Running?)
To: montag813
17
posted on
07/06/2020 7:46:55 AM PDT
by
Evil Slayer
((Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war....))
.Support Free Republic Folks, Donate Today!
Please bump the Freepathon or click above to donate or become a new monthly donor!
KAGA!
18
posted on
07/06/2020 7:47:37 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(Have You Donated to Keep Free Republic Up and Running?)
To: jazusamo
Agree on the Washington case (fining), but disagree with the the Colorado case (removal).
19
posted on
07/06/2020 7:48:18 AM PDT
by
cmj328
(We live here.)
To: Rurudyne
“Next we need them to forbid States demanding their electors ignore locally cast votes in favor of the national popular vote.”
There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids the states from directing the electors how to vote.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-170 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson