electoral college decision
electors must vote the way their state voted
at least the headline I read says so
it may be that individual states will pass laws to try to thwart the constitution - not sure
electoral college decisionFrom what I'm reading, it was really just an affirmation that the state's have the ability to determine how their electors will be bound to vote at the actual electoral college, which could be different than how the state's voters actually voted.
electors must vote the way their state voted
at least the headline I read says so
it may be that individual states will pass laws to try to thwart the constitution - not sure Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought
With respect to the EL comment ... there are prior SCOTUS decisions that might prevent the voters of one state being bound by the votes of another.Yes, I totally agree there are some that "Might" prevent the voters of one state being bound by the votes of another, but those will be cited and argued if the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ever actually gets enough traction(and it's getting closer than some think) to actually kick in.
"One man One vote" protocol. Originally Posted by LexusLover
In short, the Constitution does not speak to States’ powerThis case was indeed very narrow in the broad scope of the Electoral College and the majority opinion relied on building upon just what has been done by the states for years. Many current state legislatures want to change that in a way to subvert the Electoral College, which is what scares me.
to require Presidential electors to vote for the candidates
chosen by the people. The Court’s attempt to ground such
a power in Article II’s text falls short. Rather than contort
the language of both Article II and the state statute, I would
acknowledge that the Constitution simply says nothing
about the States’ power in this regard.
Yes, I totally agree there are some that "Might" prevent the voters of one state being bound by the votes of another, but those will be cited and argued if the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact ever actually gets enough traction(and it's getting closer than some think) to actually kick in.
And while the media is out there touting the 9-0 decision as what was stated in the OP(which is Kagan's write up of the decision) that electors must vote the way their state voted, that was not actually the reason for the final decision for the 9-0 decision in the actual case.
It was really a more 7-2 decision as to the reason with Justices Thomas and Gorsuch giving their own reasons.
Thomas's write up which was joined by Gorsuch was very telling in the pieces regarding the states rights in this instance.
Once paragraph in particular.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...9-465_i425.pdf
This case was indeed very narrow in the broad scope of the Electoral College and the majority opinion relied on building upon just what has been done by the states for years. Many current state legislatures want to change that in a way to subvert the Electoral College, which is what scares me. Originally Posted by eccielover