Posted on 12/17/2016 8:57:48 AM PST by ColdOne
The Los Angeles Times has published an editorial arguing that the Electoral College shouldnt be allowed to choose the next U.S. president, on the grounds that it is unconstitutional.
Needless to say, Kenneth Josts argument is a very bold one, since the Constitution explicitly creates the Electoral College and describes how it works; the system was even refined with the 12th Amendment. But Jost, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center, says thats no barrier to having the Supreme Court abolish the Electoral College by fiat.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
When you read in the news the unconstitutionality of a constitutionally defined process, you are reading Fake News.
Oh, it’s not the editorial board - it is an op-ed written by a Georgetown University law professor. This guy who came up with this is TEACHING constitutional law to students.
Demand foolproof voter photo ID and citizenship verification before even bringing up the subject.
We don’t want to be ruled by the big blue cities when ouf counties voted conservative — red.
Demand foolproof voter photo ID and citizenship verification before even bringing up the subject.
The Twelfth Amendment (Amendment XII) to the United States Constitution provides the procedure for electing the President and Vice President. It replaced the procedure provided in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, by which the Electoral College originally functioned. Problems with the original procedure arose in the elections of 1796 and 1800. The Twelfth Amendment refined the process whereby a President and a Vice President are elected by the Electoral College. The amendment was proposed by the Congress on December 9, 1803, and was ratified by the requisite three-fourths of state legislatures on June 15, 1804
USSC can interpret but I don’t believe they can arbitrarily change, add or remove anything from the Constitution.
That would take convening a Constitutional Convention.
If it had any merit, the same argument would be even stronger when used in reference to representation in the Senate. Pretty poor rationalization for wanting to radically change the Constitution.
Something that is written expressly into the Constitution cannot be called unconstitutional!
This is all getting silly now..
I think cutting this state loose would be a huge plus for us.
Well look on the bright side L.A. Times, you’ve worked for the last 25 years to turn California into a rogue state.
You’re only goal had to have been to drive California out of the republic.
You won’t have to worry about it much longer.
Getting?
We passed silly years ago.
Words fail me. I have come to the conclusion that these morons want a civil war. They may well get it. I don’t see how we can continue on with them. I know the few liberals I still have contact with have become totally unhinged. I plan to have nothing to do with them from now on, except for one relative.
What was these libtoons feelings about the constitutionality of the college in the 2008, 2012 electoral college votes ?
The real agenda - get rid of the Constitution - is very evident. People may wonder if lawyers portrayed in film and on TV are really that sleazy. The answer is worse, starting with this traitor.
To all those Liberals who so enamored of the popular vote, let’s have a do-over. But dead people, non-citizens and felons can’t vote. Any candidate for an office MUST provide an observer of their choosing in EACH polling place. No observer; can’t vote in that place.
Oh and the do-over applies to ALL candidates and ALL offices on the ballot(s).
>> Well, you can review his current list of picks for SCOTUS. That should give you some idea of his mindset and deliberation. <<
To the LA Times:
You are a bunch of F×××××× idiots!
This is not mexico you dumbasses, the electoral college is part of the federal elections process as spelled out in the US Constitution.
This level of stupid ignorance deserves endless scorn and ridicule by every American.
If the SC can discover previously unseen rights because society has evolved and the Constituion is a living document, then it seems right that the Justices can take the breath of life away from certain parts of the Constituion as they are no longer needed.
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.