Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie
Earlier in the year the SCOTUS made a firm unanimous ruling that faithless electors can be removed and that they must vote according the the state popular vote winner. That doesn’t mean the GOP won’t try it but it seems doubtful that it would stand.
Alito specifically pointed out a major concern that a losing party could try to campaign to electors to change votes and cause uncertainty where they shouldn’t be.
Many legal experts felt the ruling was so firm that even if states didn’t have laws in place to prevent faithless electors that they could operate under the assumption that they now do.
|
Are you sure? I thought the ruling was that state law had to be followed. It affirmed the states right to force the elector to vote in a certain manner. So if a state has no consequence for a faithless elector then a faithless elector can be faithless. In Michigan where a faithless vote constitutes resignation there can’t be a faithless elector.