How would it be possible for a POTUS to suspend elections -- the purview of the states?

[Grasswire2]

How would he be able to accomplish that? Specifically.

[TwilightZone]

1. Not happening.

It's a Trump pipe dream. He says stuff like that just to get a reaction, which he invariably gets.

It's not happening and I wish we'd stop giving it air.

[SWBTATTReg]

2. I agree. Even the midst of the Civil War, we still had elections. rump knows that he's going...

to lose and thus is desperate to sideline the upcoming election in any manner that he can. And he has no control over this entire process. NONE! Even a national emergency wouldn't do it (declared by him, which I would not be surprised that he tries to pull off).

[EndlessWire]

24. Are you kidding?

We have never had to fight off a dictator and his cult. An internal, domestic threat.

He already declared an emergency for his wall. Google his emergency powers. You will be impressed.

[SWBTATTReg]

25. No, I'm not kidding.

[sarisataka]

30. Can you reference

What part of emergency powers allows a President to suspend elections?

[leftieNanner]

51. There aren't any

But that doesn't mean that he won't try. And Barr might try to make it happen.

States control all elections, though. So I think it would be difficult.

[EndlessWire]

62. Sure

Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2020, 05:01 AM - Edit history (1)

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/RL32471.pdf
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-USA-president-postpone-an-election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_president_of_the_United_States#Powers_related_to_legislation
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418/

These are just some. You have to read these with an eye to what the Senate just did, stating that Trump can break the law if he deems it necessary. It's not a simple one-step point-to-it deal. There are several steps he would have to take. And remember, he can make any rule he wants under a declared emergency, even if it is unrelated to the emergency at hand. Trump has already declared an emergency--the Wall--and he already got it past Congress. I don't remember it ever being rescinded.

Barr will interpret the law in any way that Trump wants. We have no check on the Executive now. For instance, Giuliani is now going to turn over unvetted "intelligence" straight to Barr, bypassing everyone else. I wonder if Collins anticipated that or if she is merely "concerned." No one is going to stop him.

The real problem, regardless of how you prefer to interpret the law, is that WE NO LONGER HAVE A CONSTITUTION to interpret. Trump is wiping his ass with it. The Republicans own that shame. Now, Trump might want to see if he can maintain the illusion, in order to control us, but if he loses, he is still not going to leave.

[Kaleva]

63. One of your links says it can't be done

"There is no circumstance whatosever in the Constitution that allows a president to postpone elections for any reason. The fact that some emergency powers are stated (suspension of habeous corpus in case of a rebellion) only makes it harder to postpone elections, because postponement of elections is not mentioned even under emergency powers.

All of which is good news. And there are other reasons:

This is one of those cases in which “federalism” is probably helpful. Elections are run exclusively at the state and local level, and the Electoral College (despite being such a horrible institution in so many ways), reinforces this. The bottom line is, no election official in the country reports to the President of the United States… The president would need to have all 50 governors and their Secretaries of State in his pocket.
A president who even tried to postpone elections would likely be very quickly impeached… even if the Congress was of the same party.
All these facts help explain why Lindoln never seriously considered postponing the election of 1864, even though six months out, it looked liley he was going to lose!

This is not to say we are completely, 100% safe from a dictatorship. But there are a number of barriers that would need to be removed first. "

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-USA-president-postpone-an-election

[EndlessWire]

66. But, does it really?

"This is not to say we are completely, 100% safe from a dictatorship..." And one way he can avoid the election is that the Congress can delegate the power to postpone an election to him. We have already seen that the Senate will not impeach him for anything. He already has had an emergency declared. And, we have seen the quality of the Repub Senate. As I said, there are several steps he can take.

You're not going to find it codified in a single line. In fact, all those sources say it can't be done, but then go on to say there is a way. With Trump apparently planning to arrest a number of Dems, and people who oppose him, how hard will it be for the Congress to delegate to him the power to postpone this Federal election? From there, he just doesn't have to ever let them be held. Follow the breadcrumbs. Plus, he has Barr in there to interpret the laws his way.

Trump would probably like them to be held and to win on his own, but if it is looking bad for him, watch out.

[AncientGeezer]

74. You think the House is going to pass that legislation?

[Kaleva]

82. The House would never go along with delegating power to Trump to postpone elections

[dware]

47. Please highlight the power to suspend elections. nt

[magicarpet]

54. Well the Twilight Zone is here,...

It pertains to the Patriot Act,... powers given to Cheney/Bush - 7/14/2004.

For pdf document see below,


*~*~*~*~
Google:

Library of Congress

"Executive Branch Power to Postpone Elections"

Order code: RL 32471
*~*~*~*~*~

[EndlessWire]

67. See above. n/t

[hughee99]

77. Why wouldn't he just declare all dem voters ineligible or

Or remove all but his name from the ballot.

Look in the bright side, if you think he’s going to cancel the elections, you must think they’re not rigged anymore.

[EndlessWire]

27. I hope we do give it air.

Who would have thought that Trump would find William Barr to take over and shield Trump from any investigation? Who would have thought that a guy like McConnell would show up to cause us such grief? Who would have thought that a coronavirus would pop up to create a scenario ripe for exploitation?

Who would have thought that the Republican Party, save for a few individuals, would have their spines, balls, and ovaries dissolve in a puddle at their cowardly feet?

We are fighting on all fronts now. Who would have thought that would be necessary? It is better that EVERYBODY knows what Trump has the power to do to us.

[TwilightZone]

32. Why should we waste time on a pipe dream?

It's simply not happening. It's a ridiculous notion, regardless of its origin.

Trump says stuff to rile people up and sow division. Mission accomplished. We fall for this nonsense every, single time.

[EndlessWire]

64. We need to prepare just in case.

I am most concerned that you think this idea is sowing division. What division? Also, I am not riled up.

Here's an example of what riles me up: Graham informing us that half the people involved in the Russia probe are going to jail. And, numerous other examples. For what reason was Graham talking with Barr, and the same day this subject of arrests dribbles out of Graham's mouth?

What Trump does is throw up trial balloons. He'll say something to see what kind of rise it gets. If he thinks he can get away with it, he then does it. Also, sometimes he just refuses to comply with the law, such as, the Emoluments Clause, his taxes, his refusal to turn over documents or comply with subpoenas, etc. He's a gangster, not a President. He considers himself above the law, and apparently so does the GOP.

How stupid is Graham? Why is he cheerfully associating himself with foreknowledge of a purge? During that strange rant, the one where they played "Hail To The Chief," Trump was blasting the two FBI people, and he said they weren't getting away with it, don't worry, he had his best people on it. Words to that effect. Trump plans to persecute them, too.

My point is, we are dealing with a vindictive guy that cannot let anything go, and he has this psychological need to get even for any perceived slight to himself. He'll probably want to get even with all us, eventually. You are not dealing with a guy who is normal.

That's what makes this "ridiculous notion" not so farfetched. Did you *ever* think that you would hear a Senator espouse the ridiculous notion that Trump can basically do anything he wants?? Apparently, as long as we have spineless GOPs, he can.

You know that those people have taken some kind of dirty money, and they don't want us to find out, right?

[TDale313]

31. Ya know... we keep saying he can't won't do things

And then he does. And blows right through any precedence or rules he doesn’t... and waits to see who can actually stop him. They will try and steal this thing if they can’t win it... or just refuse to accept the results. They probably won’t cancel the elections... they’ll just declare victory whether it’s legit or not. It’s not who votes that counts... it’s who counts the votes. We need to be fucking ready for a massive fight on this.

[bluestarone]

3. i'm sure no way can they STOP elections. That said what i would fear is

Either electrical problems OR the election is so close that BARR gets involved somehow. So important to get HUGE number of voters AGAINST these assholes!! We need the White house, Senate, AND House!!

[2naSalit]

4. +1

[shanti]

14. The grid going down

is my biggest nightmare.

[bluestarone]

18. TRUE! actually ANYTHING that effects the election will

spring BARR into action!! I do fear that these rethugs have a PLAN!

[EndlessWire]

68. But, actually, he can postpone the election.

And, just never hold them.

[Happy Hoosier]

5. Well, who will stop him?

With his own party willing to to support whatever move he makes, regardless of legality, who will stop him from doing whatever he wants? And I no longer believe they would stop him from doing anything. I would never have thought they would allow him to leverage foreign policy for his own political benefit, but they did so with barely a whimper.

[TDale313]

26. There's the problem.

They will try and steal this thing. If they can’t do that, expect him to claim shenanigans and just refuse to leave and see who will actually make him leave office. This asshole is not preparing for a peaceful transition of power.

[EndlessWire]

28. I agree. n/t

[CanonRay]

52. This is exactly right

Who in the hell would stop him? The Congress? Roberts' Supreme Court? Make me laugh. The GOP wouldn't lift a finger.

[not_the_one]

6. States controlled by republican legislatures could refuse to run the election in that state,

or certify the results.

If they are determined, they will find a way. Remember, we are in a new game. It doesn't have to legal.

See what we got in 2000 when the issue was taken all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court said "to continue to count the votes would cause harm to George W. Bush". So the state of Florida STOPPED COUNTING THE VOTES!!!

[Ms. Toad]

13. Elections are run and certified by the state election entity

(Typically a board of elections - but whatever the name, each state has one.)

State legislatures do not run elections or certify election result

[not_the_one]

35. Who controls the state election entity?

The republican legislature?

Like I said, new game, there are no rules, since they ignore them at their pleasure...

The system is now, officially, broken.

[Ms. Toad]

43. The legislature has absolutely nothing to do with it in all but about 5 states.

Last edited Sun Feb 9, 2020, 06:37 PM - Edit history (1)

In those states, their role is limited to appointing the head of the election board. Once the head is appointed, they run independently.

There are rules, and every election board I've worked with is extremely careful to observe them. (I've worked, in a couple of different capacities with election boards in at least a dozen state, at both the state and local level.) Your "sky is falling" perspective is not warranted as far as elections.

In every jurisdiciton I'm aware of, the election board is made up of equal numbers of democrats and republicans. At every step of the election, members of both parties are present.

In elections I've participated in as an observer on behal of the Dem presidential candidate, that care about ensuring bipartisan representation has included the Republican observer notifying the Democratic observer that they are short republican precinct workers - to ensure that everythign is done by the book so there is no question about the validity of the election.

Volunteer to be an observer at the next election. It will give you more comfort about how seriously election boards take their responsibility.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

45. +1

[not_the_one]

50. Okay. I accept that if Trump says there will be no election,

there is absolutely nothing the republicans who control the state legislatures, can/will do to support him in this endeavor.

Absolutely nothing.

Let's see how that works out.

[Zolorp]

7. Can't stop them but a simple way to win them

All he has to do is have the Democrats he wants to lose arrested on October 31.

Who stops him then?

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. That might actually drive up turnout for Dems

The Dem nominee would still be on the ballot, even if they had been arrested.

[DBoon]

29. We've already had a presidential candidate campaign from Federal prison

Debs' speeches against the Wilson administration and the war earned the enmity of President Woodrow Wilson, who later called Debs a "traitor to his country".[42] On June 16, 1918, Debs made a speech in Canton, Ohio urging resistance to the military draft of World War I. He was arrested on June 30 and charged with ten counts of sedition.[43]
...
Debs went to prison on April 13, 1919.[4] In protest of his jailing, Charles Ruthenberg led a parade of unionists, socialists, anarchists and communists to march on May 1 (May Day) in Cleveland, Ohio. The event quickly broke into the violent May Day riots of 1919.

Debs ran for president in the 1920 election while in prison in Atlanta, Georgia, at the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. He received 919,799[47] votes (3.4%),[48] slightly less than he had won in 1912, when he received 6%, the highest number of votes for a Socialist Party presidential candidate in the United States.[4][49] During his time in prison, Debs wrote a series of columns deeply critical of the prison system. They appeared in sanitized form in the Bell Syndicate and were published in his only book, Walls and Bars, with several added chapters. It was published posthumously.[1]

- from Wikipedia

[Grasswire2]

8. How many states currently are in control by Dems in state government?

Anyone know, offhand?

[OliverQ]

21. Dems control 19 State legislatures.

Republicans control 29.

[Grasswire2]

22. ugh

thanks for the info

[moondust]

9. Barr + 5/4 SCOTUS?

Those two things have fed his boundless arrogance. I don't know if it's possible but I don't know if I'd rule out some variation on what happened to Election 2000.

[Grasswire2]

10. But how would this happen? (in our speculating...)

A proclamation from the White House?

How could Barr seize power over states? How could that be enforced?

(Aside from a complete collapse of ALL levels of governmental structure)

[moondust]

12. Don't know.

I just know that Republicans are famous for finding new and better ways to manipulate the rules and norms of democracy to their advantage.

[EndlessWire]

33. Martial law. n/t

[DavidDvorkin]

11. If GOP-controlled states didn't vote but Democratic ones did

We'd win the Electoral College in a landslide.

[Cosmocat]

72. Yes, but ....

He will say the election was in incomplete to justify not leaving office ...

[DavidDvorkin]

83. He can say whatever he wants

He will only be able to stay in office by means of a naked coup. That's a different matter entirely.

[Cosmocat]

84. We are about 1/2 into the naked coup as of today

see, the senate's actions in the impeachment trial, Barr, unfettered emoluments offenses, etc.

We have police charged with protecting state capitals letting people in full body armor, masks and armed with ARs into capitals unimpeded, police going along for the ride as group of people in full body armor, masks and armed with ARs march around DC ...

They are a sneeze away from prosecuting Biden and who knows who else, after years of bullshit congressional investigations into Hillary.

In the early 2000s Rs pulled this phone jamming shit and people got prosecuted and some even got jail. Not a single GD thing will happen for them doing it in Iowa.

States not having elections would further that slide and his declaring the election was incomplete would further advance the coup.

People keep saying "he can't" while he simply KEEPS and pushing it further and further.

Seriously, he says he is not going to leave, and you know full fucking well Rs in congress will back that play, who puts him out in theory, and if they stand down ...

Not sure if you are a Game of Thrones fan, but season one, Ned was the by the book guy, and thought he had everything in place and the bad guys out manuvered him, ended up with him loosing his head.

Its a coin flip right now ... Give him most of this year to game it even more.

[sarisataka]

15. A POTUS cannot suspend the election

It is delusional fear mongering.

Also it would be irrelevant as there is no need for a popular election to select a new President. That is done by the states.

[EndlessWire]

34. He sure as shit can!

Sorry, but you don't understand what the Republican Senate just handed him!

[sarisataka]

39. How does he suspend the election?

We will not only be voting for President but Representatives, Senators and state level offices. Those are run by each state. When he says there will be no election, what stops the states from saying no, we will vote anyway?

[dware]

48. He sure as shit can't.;

Sorry, but I do understand how elections are run.

This is nothing more than bullshit fearmongering.

[EndlessWire]

69. I'm not going to argue anymore about this.

See above. I have an old, sick cat on my lap who I am probably going to have to put to sleep tomorrow, so I am not going to continue. I know it makes it look like a cop out, but it's just the truth.

I want to apologize for the curse word.

[dware]

79. I'm so sorry for you having to put down your cat.

Hugs for you.

[struggle4progress]

16. Why would we waste time trying to imagine a plausible way forward for thus?

[Grasswire2]

20. you can't fight a battle without imagining what the enemy has planned.

Too often, we stumble along and are blindsided.

Strategy depends on knowing the enemy.

[EndlessWire]

36. I agree. n/t

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. The presidential election process is spelled out in the Constitution

Any fantasies of Trump suspending the election this November are delusional.

[EndlessWire]

37. WHAT DID YOU JUST WITNESS DURING THE IMPEACHMENT??

And, excuse me, but a different opinion is not "delusional." That is an insult.

[dware]

49. Trump suspended the elections during the impeachment trial????

When did this happen?

Just stop with the bull excrement fearmongering.

[EndlessWire]

70. I'm sorry

I didn't realize you think in black and white.

The. Senate. just. said. that. Trump. can. break. the. law. if. he. deems. it. necessary. for. national. security.

There.

[0rganism]

23. don't confuse no one here having a specific answer for "it's not going to happen"

that would be a mistake

looks like AG Barr is going to start pushing some very sketchy prosecutions

POTUS won't even have to suspend elections if his political opponents are imprisoned

how would it be possible? watch and see.

[EndlessWire]

38. That's what Putin did as well. n/t

[alwaysinasnit]

40. Whatever the likely possibilities are of this happening, please do not underestimate the lengths

William Barr will go to to ensure that the office of president becomes the only one with any effective power. The packing of the courts would be useful to legitimize any executive decision.

[Cosmocat]

73. For Republic POTUSs

They will immediately tact the other direction if we somehow get him out in January 2022.

[in2herbs]

41. Take what occurred in Iowa, extrapolate to the presidential election, and because most states do

not have paper back-up, on election day there will be no clear winner because of election "difficulties." At that instant trump will declare that the next president can't be determined and because the US cannot be without a president he will stay in office until another election. The Constitution sets out one day in November for elections. He stays in power and the Rs won't agree on another election date.

[sarisataka]

42. Could you please do me a favor

And point me to the Article and Section of the Constitution that sets the election day?

[in2herbs]

44. In accordance with the electoral college system--the system established under the Constitution -

Congress chose the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November to harmonize current electoral practice with the existing 34-day window in Federal law, as the span between Election Day and the first Wednesday in December is always 29 days.

[sarisataka]

46. Thank you. But as you indicate

The date is not set in the Constitution. A reading of the document will confirm it never mentions a need for a popular election. What is does establish is the EC which derives from the popular vote by custom, not law(with a few execptions).

The elector's votes are what matters and the sitting President has no role in the counting, certification or determining the winner. The Constitution does include a process for selecting a President if the electoral vote does not determine a victor.

[roamer65]

53. No elections, no federal government.

That means the states become the government.

[hughee99]

55. Are we doing this again?

I remember when republicans said Clinton was going to suspend the election, then Dems saying Bush was going to do it, then republicans saying that Obama was going to do it, and now here we are again. It isn’t going to happen.

[Ms. Toad]

56. Correct. We laugh at republicans who are so ignorant about civics & reality

Then thread after thread here is full of crap that is just as ignorant.

I never thought I'd say that we need to emphasize middle/high school Civics in - but I think we do.

[EndlessWire]

71. You call other people ignorant

Really? The argument was over could he do it, not would he do it. But my position is, yes, he can, as long as he follows the steps, and, yes he would, among other things he could do, if he thinks he is going to lose. And, no, I don't know what we are going to do.

[AncientGeezer]

75. The steps......you think the House is going to pass the legislation

that allows a POTUS to stop elections?
That's nuts

[Ms. Toad]

76. I called chicken little crap, that is based on a lack of understanding of basic civics, ignorant

Not people. If you want to adopt the label based on what you are posting - that's up to you.

That label also applies to fear-mongering content about trump not leaving the white house if he loses couples with the suggestion that we will be helpless if he does so.

Both belong in the conspiracy theory/crazy talk forum.

[Timewas]

57. Martial Law

Typically, the imposition of martial law accompanies curfews; the suspension of civil law, civil rights, and habeas corpus; and the application or extension of military law or military justice to civilians. Civilians defying martial law may be subjected to military tribunal (court-martial).

Not sure they could suspend elections but they could try and that would make it pretty difficult..

[sandensea]

59. +1

Bush himself was said to have entertained the idea of invoking Continuity of Government powers, had Ken Blackwell's Ohio heist in '04 failed.

And if Bush was seriously mulling that option - you can bet Don Cheetoleone has asked Barr to explore every possible avenue to let him invoke this, be it a legal avenue or not.

Interesting times, these.

[First Speaker]

58. If Trump--and the GOP--decide to violate the Constitution with impunity...

...then paper guarantees aren't worth toilet paper. They have recently shown their willingness--eagerness--to do just this. I think it unlikely that the election will literally be cancelled; I no longer regard it as impossible. What I regard as *very* likely is a massive theft of the election, if it ends with Trump anywhere near 270 electoral votes. Immediate cries, from him, the GOP traitors in Congress, and Fox "News", of voter fraud, irregularities, you name it. Outright bribing--or threats--to electors. Appeals to the Federal courts. And guess who the judges will be beholden to? Finally, after a Brooks Brothers riot or two, a corrupt Supreme Court declaring Trump the winner. Anyone think this *isn't* being planned for, right now?

[Grasswire2]

60. Incidentally, while NH is using handmarked paper ballots (Yay) they are also using OPTICAL SCANNING.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Grasswire2]

61. AND.....Nevada!! Using new untested software too. Dammit!

[link:http://

Link to tweet

?s=20|

[Dorian Gray]

65. I don't believe he would be able to....

[tritsofme]

78. No. Those saying he can look as foolish as the CT nuts claiming Obama would cancel the election

And the CT nuts claiming Bush would cancel the elections

And the CT nuts claiming Clinton would cancel the elections.

Well, you get the picture!

[DBoon]

80. SCOTUS overrulled Florida's vote counting process in 2000

Not inconceivable something like that could happen again on a larger scale.

[Coleman]

81. States are responsible for selecting the electors, hence the Compact

In repub states, the repub led legislatures could Constitutionally choose the electors, not the popular vote. Florida back during Gore/Bush election was very close to doing that. If the court chose the recount instead of awarding it to Bush, the legislature was ready to give the electoral votes to Bush. So count the repub dominated state legislatures and the accompanying state lectoral votes to see if they reach 270.

It could be the next best thing to suspending the elections.

[LiberalFighter]

85. I would welcome Trump cancelling the elections...

and only the states that would go for him complying with it. While the rest of the states held theirs.

[NYC Liberal]

87. If there's no election, his term still ends at noon on January 20, 2021.

Even if you figured out a legal way for a president to suspend/postpone/cancel an election, his term would still end. There's no legal way for a president to remain in office.

The Constitution is not specific about the process for choosing electors and leaves it up to the states. It also says Congress determines the date that the electors meet. So, alright, you maybe have some wiggle room there to come up with a legal rationale for postponing the election. But it is very clear and specific about the end of the president and vice president's terms:

20th Amendment, Section 1:

The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Trump and Pence's terms end on January 20, 2021. No election has taken place, therefore Section 3 comes into play:

the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

The law that Congress passed is the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, which states:

if, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.

tl;dr If Trump found a way to suspend the presidential election, then he and Pence would leave office on January 20 and the Speaker of the House would take over until an election was held.

[Grasswire2]

88. thanks for the research nt

[Bettie]

89. Who knows?

Heck, he gets enough right wing governors to agree not to hold state elections, there is no federal election because there are no results from some number of states.

The fact is that there are no longer any norms, no rules, no rule of law, only what Agent Orange decides to do. The whole system has been nearly destroyed.

Can he do that? I don't know.

I hope not, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

That's the problem. Our system works as long as both sides agree that there are rules, that laws are a thing. Right now? Only one side agrees, the other side doesn't even give those laws, rules, and norms a passing glance, except to laugh at the rubes who still follow them.

[Brainfodder]

90. Paranoia much??

Do you really think in modernish 2020 Amurika we will have to fight our neighbors over OUR political affiliation?

No, it will take making us destitute and struggling for warmth and/or food.

By then I will be so ------- that I won't care what happens?

That and mother nature seems to have plans for us can't get along (big picture) idiot humans.

We are idiots: 1 guy is blocking new laws in this country, 1! Just one super asshole in broad daylight in front of everyone doing this, that precedent is so evil you hope he chokes on his throat pouch?

So please don't get confused, we have a slew of evil this more recent FUBAR status of the United States of Whatever?

I am never forgiving the treatment of Puerto Rico and the no rush to fix lead in drinking water in Flint and other places, among a litany of other things?