“They are not bound by anything but their own conscious.”
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties’ nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called “faithless Electors” may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.
Therefore, if the electors are given to state laws concerning their vote, and not by the federal law that created the electoral college and abides by it to over rule popular vote, then we have a conflict of interest for the actions taken voting either way. I see it as unconstitutional and not within states rights to over-rule a federal election using independent voters by state decisions.
rwood
I think the codicil that states appoint electors by whichever manner the state prescribes makes the faithless elector laws constitutional. The constitution deliberately says that the states can make up their own rules on the subject.
Thumbs up in agreement!