I have debunked this a dozen times.
No.
PRECISELY because of FL 2000, where the USSC itself ruled on the validity of the Dec. 14 deadline for certifying electors, nothing will go past Dec. 14.
For any court to reverse ITSELF (which has happened only twice that I know of in history-—Dred Scott, and Plessey Ferguson), and both 60-100 years later-—is a very tall order. To reverse a court from just 20 years ago would be unheard of.
No, the FL Bush v Gore affirmed the hard and fast rule of Dec. 14 for certifying electors. The question after that would not be Roberts but would be Grassley and Yertle as to whether they would call the “electoral college” official if some states did not certify, say, CA or NY. The law is actually murky as AuH20Republican and others have suggested. One interpretation is that the college is the college, if it’s 100 EVs that come in, or all 538. Another interpretation, however, is that ONLY if 538 come in is the “college” officially opened.
However, if it drags on and goes into the House, the House must vote by DELEGATION not members. Trump wins (GOP has 26 delegations, and that won’t change)
In other words, I can’t see any reasonable path to avoid the Dec. 14 deadline or simply not submit electors. And realize any state that did that would cede a MASSIVE level of power to all the other states, and it would be a disastrous precedent for that state in particular. I just don’t see it.
So is this kind of election, LS.
I have read that the election results must be certified all at once-ie no partial certification.
So if there’s confusion about the President and VP, the results of the candidates for the House and Senate can not be certified as a partial - it’s a packaged deal.
Is this correct?