Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MerryBlooms

(11,773 posts)
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 04:59 PM Jan 2020

Breaking: SCOTUS agrees to hear Faithless Elector case

Jan. 17, 2020, 12:31 PM PST / Updated Jan. 17, 2020, 12:35 PM PST
By Pete Williams


WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to take up an issue that could change a key element of the system America uses to elect its president, with a decision likely in the spring just as the campaign heats up.

The answer to the question could be a decisive one: are the electors who cast the actual Electoral College ballots for president and vice-president required to follow the results of the popular vote in their states? Or are they free to vote as they wish?

A decision that they are free agents could give a single elector, or a small group of them, the power to decide the outcome of a presidential election if the popular vote results in an apparent Electoral College tie or is close.

"It's not hard to imagine how a single 'faithless elector', voting differently than his or her state did, could swing a close presidential election," said Mark Murray, NBC News senior political editor.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/faithless-elector-supreme-court-will-hear-case-could-change-how-n1113051
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Breaking: SCOTUS agrees to hear Faithless Elector case (Original Post) MerryBlooms Jan 2020 OP
Go one step further and outlaw the whole electoral college. Dennis Donovan Jan 2020 #1
I so agree. n/t CaliforniaPeggy Jan 2020 #2
Agree totally Bayard Jan 2020 #6
I also agree!! Talitha Jan 2020 #7
I agree, Dennis. Would love to see that part of our system in the trash. MerryBlooms Jan 2020 #10
This is a good one! Bok_Tukalo Jan 2020 #3
Yeah we need to abolish this crap. Tiggeroshii Jan 2020 #4
Why bother even having Electors if they aren't allowed to use their judgement? BuffaloJackalope Jan 2020 #5
The idea was to have electors reflect the intent of the majority of voters in their Blue_true Jan 2020 #8
Hope the law's upheld Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2020 #9
*fine*, SCotUS, how'bout hearing a faithless-Senate-juror case. In a timely way, like NOW?!1 UTUSN Jan 2020 #11

Dennis Donovan

(18,770 posts)
1. Go one step further and outlaw the whole electoral college.
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 05:10 PM
Jan 2020

Twice, in 20 years, we've been saddled with POTUSes who didn't win the popular vote, and went on to be two of the WORST POTUSES EVER.

Fuck the electoral college once and for all.

MerryBlooms

(11,773 posts)
10. I agree, Dennis. Would love to see that part of our system in the trash.
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 10:29 PM
Jan 2020

Stronger safeguards in our elections, free ID, every state with vote by mail option, every state with a paper ballot trail.

Bok_Tukalo

(4,323 posts)
3. This is a good one!
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 05:15 PM
Jan 2020

If the so-called originalists (who are really neo-feudalists) on the Court rule in any way that constrains the Electors, it will be a tell that they aren't really all that caring of the Founders' intent.

The danger for the neo-feudalists on the Bench lies in delegitimizing the College.

 

Tiggeroshii

(11,088 posts)
4. Yeah we need to abolish this crap.
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 05:22 PM
Jan 2020

If we allow a few people -a minority of the country unrespresetnavie of it as a whole, to circumvent the whole process then WTFs the point??

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
8. The idea was to have electors reflect the intent of the majority of voters in their
Fri Jan 17, 2020, 08:26 PM
Jan 2020

state. Since electors tend to be public officials, let's say in my state of Florida, Biden, or Sanders or Warren won the majority in the state, thereby taking Florida's electoral votes. But say the national electoral totals are close, with the Democrat having 273 electoral votes, enough to take the presidency. Now back to Florida, let's say a handful of republicans realize that going against the wish of the majority of voters of their state, they can hand an electoral victory to Trump by taking away some Florida electoral votes from the Democrat.

The idea of having electors vote against the wishes of the majority of their state voters came up after President Obama beat McCain and Romney. It was a tool that would allow republicans in states where republicans control the Legistlature to deny a Democrat an electoral victory,

It is a very dangerous idea that goes against the majority rule credo of our nation, even after taking into account how that credo has been abused at times during the past.

I hope that the Court trash the idea and rule that electors are bound by the will of the majority of voters in their state (or in the cases of Vermont and Nebraska, the section of the state that sent them to the electoral college).

I would like to see the electoral college eliminated and elections decided on the popular vote, but this attempt at change doesn't do that, what it does do is give republicans one more way to steal elections for President.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Breaking: SCOTUS agrees t...