Alan Dershowitz Says Supreme Court May Rule to Let Legislators Pick Alternate Electors

Epoch Times ^ | 12/07/2020 | Tom Ozimek

[SeekAndFind]

And Rudy has rightly pointed to legislatures because therein lies the ultimate—other than the Supreme Court of the United States—ability to have an effect on the just-concluded election.”

[Guenevere]

Bump

[I am Richard Brandon]

With John Roberts running the show, not a chance!

[alancarp]

It’s gonna take extraordinary action, for sure, but since we’ve already had an extraordinary election theft.... that would seem to be an appropriate response, eh?

[ClearCase_guy]

“There certainly is probably cause for investigating …"

Sorry to be pedantic, but a fine lawyer like Dershowitz would certainly say "probable cause". Too bad the journalist is unfamiliar with the phrase.

[Jim W N]

The U.S. Constitution Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2 authorizes the state to “appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct” the electors.

They don’t need SCOUTS permission. The State Legislatures already have constitutional authority to act here, as Rudy Giuliani rightly pointed out.

There’s way too much unconstitutional authority given to SCOTUS as though they were some kind of oligarchy.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: With John Roberts running the show, not a chance!

In fact, I think this is the perfect solution for John Roberts. He’s the man who refuses to take any stance that will be perceived as political at all.

Punting it back to the state legislatures is great way to say - “it’s not my responsibility to decide ... here, you decide it!”.

[Jim W N]

I didn’t know you were a pandemic. Hope you’re OK.

[entropy12]

Electors have to be accepted and approved by congress before the winner becomes president-elect.

[rxsid]

"The U.S. Constitution Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2 authorizes the state to “appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct” the electors.

They don’t need SCOUTS permission. The State Legislatures already have constitutional authority to act here"

Exactly right. This states' right, already exists.

[Little Ray]

I don’t see that helping us.
How many of the contested states have ‘Pubbie legislatures, and now many of those legislatures have the guts to certify for President Trump?

[Leep]

Just call it a tax and maybe Roberts will go along.

[OttawaFreeper]

Already Mo Brooks is saying he does not have any confidence in the integrity of the vote that took place in GA and other places.

[DoodleDawg]

Attorney Alan Dershowitz said on Sunday that he believes the Supreme Court may get involved in adjudicating on whether state legislators have the power to pick alternate Electoral College electors who would vote for President Donald Trump if legislatures determine there was voter fraud, even after an initial slate of electors has cast its votes on Dec. 14.

If any legislature did select a competing slate of electors then I pretty much guarantee that the matter would wind up before the Supreme Court. Not hard to predict that one.

[HandBasketHell]

So if SCOTUS says that legislatures can seat whatever electors they want despite the certified results, then that puts it back into the hands of the legislature. So at that point our only hope is with the spineless GOPe.

[faithhopecharity]

Yes —- however No Supreme Court ruling is needed ——for state legislatures to name their electors

[Kevin C]

It has been abundantly clear that very few state legislators have any desire to take this step.

[FreeReign]

Exactly right. This states' right, already exists.

It's not a "state right". It's the state legislators have a federal power.

[9YearLurker]

I wish I had more confidence in small-time, corrupt RINO state legislators.

[circlecity]

“So if SCOTUS says that legislatures can seat whatever electors they want despite the certified results, then that puts it back into the hands of the legislature. So at that point our only hope is with the spineless GOPe.”

Good luck with that. I have no confidence in the legislators.