> Can they do this? <
Yes, it seems like they can. The Constitution gives the states great latitude in deciding how they will assign their electoral votes.
So if you believe in the giving the states as much power as possible, then you’ve got to accept that this is constitutional. Stupid, yes. But not unconstitutional.
I would say that if a state chose to do this unilaterally without conditions, then yes, it would be constitutional.
To me, it hits a wall when it binds the state to the actions of other states. It is no longer "a state" doing what "it" wants.
Making it contingent on a compact of states totaling 270 EV no longer makes it a single state doing what it wants.
Here is a question: what happens if Puerto Rico decides to become a state? They would get 3 Electoral College votes, making the majority now 541/2=271 votes. The compact would fall short by one vote. Does that make the compact invalid, or does that still bind the states to deliver a minority vote?
-PJ
“The Constitution gives the states great latitude in deciding how they will assign their electoral votes.”
As long as basic constitutional principles are followed. The primary constitutional issue here is forcing a slate of electors to vote against their will and as a result, disconnecting those electors from the voters of that state and therefore disenfranchising the state’s voters.
It’s unconstitutional in that this is a pact not approved by Congress. They’ve passed it to where it only takes effect if enough other states vote with them. That’s a pact.