IF Congress becomes a clusterf*ck on Jan 4 & it goes to the Governors, do they have a deadline?

[Miles Archer]

Trying to process what was laid out on MSNBC tonight.

1). An assumption that the SCOTUS won't touch the Texas "lawsuit."

2). Electoral College certifies votes on Monday.

3). Votes go to Congress on Jan 4

4). Members of House & Senate can challenge the votes

5). If the House & Senate don't come to an agreement and accept the votes, each state challenge goes to the Governors of that state

Did I get that right? Please feel to correct if I didn't.

So my question is IF any or all of the challenged states go to the Governors, do they have a deadline in which to respond?

[vlyons]

1. I understood that a congressional challenge goes to the govs of the states being challenged

not the challenging state Texas. So the govs of the 4 states being challenged have already said that Biden won. This is all an exercise in fleecing money from stupid Trumpers, who believe that they can invalidate the vote some how some way.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. For a challenge to happen, both the House & Senate have to vote to reject the electors.

With the Democrats in the Majority of the House, it's not going to happen.

[wnylib]

16. In that case, it would be unresolved

by Congress and then go to the governors, wouldn't it?

[Drunken Irishman]

17. No. It takes a majority in both chambers to reject the electors.

If they're not rejected, be default they stand.

[wnylib]

18. Thanks.

[Cha]

21. Thank God We Had the Blue WAVE

Victory in 2018! I read that, too.. yesterday from some DU lawyers.

Can you imagine Biden Harris Winning in a Landslide & the damn senate & house rejecting them?!!!

[Boogiemack]

8. Is the outcome to have SCOTUS take the case and rule unanimously against Trump?

Settled law???

[ancianita]

12. I think they'll see all this coming and will refuse to hear the case despist all the amicae battles.

We're finding ourselves, imo, in a lawyer civil war.

[Miles Archer]

13. That's what I tried to write, perhaps confusingly

Yes, it goes to the governor of the state being challenged, not Texas.

[Drunken Irishman]

2. The only way the chamber doesn't certify Biden as the winner is if Pelosi signs off on it.

The Constitution states that both the House and Senate must reject a contention - and a contention MUST be signed by both members of the chamber (a representative and senator). For the House to reject the slate of one state's electors, Democrats would have to vote to do it since they hold a Majority in the House.

It won't happen.

[sfstaxprep]

9. Another Question, To See When Our Democracy Will Inevitably Crumble

What would happen if the repubs controlled both houses, and both rejected the slate of a state's electors?

[Drunken Irishman]

11. I don't think that'll ever happen.

And while I understand your concerns, I am not going to entertain that level of fear. I don't even think the Senate will vote to reject. It takes a majority and I doubt there's 50 Republican senators who will vote to toss electors. You might find a few but nowhere near the level. And I stand by that statement knowing that there's a chance we find out with the Senate on January 6th as I fully expect at least a challenge from a sitting member of the House (remember, in 2016, plenty of Democratic congresspeople challenged the electors of specific states but could not get a senator to sign off on it). I think it's possible a senator does that this go around but again, I think it'll be improbable 50 senators do - and because of that, even if the GOP held the House, I would be very, very skeptical of that happening on that alone.

[uponit7771]

24. +1

[Freddie]

25. At least Romney and Toomey would not go along

And Collins would be “concerned”. But as long as Dems have a majority in the House, it ends there.

[Drunken Irishman]

27. To be honest, I doubt they could get 10 senators to do it.

[StarfishSaver]

32. They won't get enough Senators to agree to reject the vote

And McConnell's going to do everything he can to keep this from going to a vote.

[unblock]

4. If an elector's vote is challenged, the house and senate vote on the challenge

Both have to uphold the challenge by simple majority for that electoral vote to be discarded.

If either house fails to uphold the challenge, the electoral vote stands.

If the houses disagree, the electoral vote stands.

The states aren't involved at that point.

[sfstaxprep]

5. What If One Or More Of The Governors Don't Say Biden Won?

We're headed down this road, and assuming the Governors will not go along with this charade.

But what would happen if a couple of them were Cult members, and refused to declare that Biden won their state's electoral votes?

[Drunken Irishman]

7. We are not heading down that road. For electors to be challenged, BOTH chambers have to vote to toss

And it has to be a majority.

There's no way the House votes to toss electors. And I highly doubt the Senate would, either.

That means the electors will be upheld.

It won't make it to the Governors, even if there's a challenge supported by both a House member and a sitting Senator. If that does happen, then both chambers confer and debate and then vote on whether to reject the electors - both having to vote in t he majority to do so. Not going to happen.

[ramblin_dave]

6. Not quite right

The counting in the joint session is on Jan 6.

If electors are challenged, only the electors that didn't meet safe harbor can be challenged, just Wisconsin I think.

But if electors are challenged, then House and Senate vote separately to accept or reject. Both must reject. The House will not reject.

End of story.

[unblock]

20. Safe harbor doesn't override congress's procedure to challenge electoral votes

I believe the safe harbor date only applies to challenges brought by other candidates and so on prior to the state certifying its electors.

[ramblin_dave]

30. So what does safe harbor mean?

This article in The Guardian has a fairly complete explanation...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/08/us-election-2020-safe-harbor-deadline-congress-republicans

Safe harbor means that if states resolve all challenges in accordance with state laws by the safe harbor date, then congress deems the result to be conclusive and not subject to challenge. The article does point out that some members might try to challenge electors anyway, breaking the promise made by law. But getting other members to agree to break the promise and consider a challenge is a bigger hurdle to get past, and unlikely to occur.

[unblock]

33. I've seen conflicting articles, so I read the text of the safe harbor law itself

If a state resolves all disputes by the safe harbor deadline, then it says congress won't challenge that state's determination of which electors they send to the electoral college.

But that still lets congress challenge an elector's actual vote (they can say who votes is resolved, but claim the elector made some kind of error in the process of casting and transmitting the electoral vote itself) or to claim that the state hadn't properly resolved all disputes in time or just plain ignore it and challenge it anyway.

[vlyons]

10. Thanks for all the clarification

I feel like we're going to get a seminar in electoral college law, because sure some GOP assholes will challenge the electors in a great grandstand effort to get Trumper attention and raise money. Clear, we need to dump the electoral college and move to a popular vote. This 18th Century electoral college crap is for the birds.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. The electors have been challenged before...

Just as recently as 2016 a few House Democrats challenged the electors. But because it takes both a senator and a member of the House to force a challenge, it never went anywhere.

I think there's a better chance this go around that a senator signs off on it (probably Cruz) but I am interested to see how McConnell handles that knowing the potential parliamentary shit-show it could create (especially since the outcome is inevitable anyway).

[Baclava]

15. Jan 20th is the only strict deadline set by the Constitution, it mandates current presidency ends

If at that point Congress still cannot agree on a winner, Pelosi would serve as acting President

[sarisataka]

19. Where do Governors become involved?

#5 is wrong- the chambers do not vote to accept the challenged votes, they vote to reject them. If both vote to reject, the those electoral votes are tossed and not replaced. If one or both does not vote to reject, the votes are counted.

[DeminPennswoods]

29. The governors sign a Letter of Ascertainment

certifying that the electors have been duly elected. If there should be a deadlock, then the Letters of Ascertainment prevail.

I know, for example, that Gov Wolf (PA) signed a Letter of Ascertainment the day the day the vote for president was certified here.

[sarisataka]

35. The Certificate of Ascertainment is what reports the vote

And it is those votes that would be the subject of the challenge.

If the challenge is deadlocked, say Senate votes to reject while the House does not, the votes are counted. Only if both chambers vote to reject would the votes not be counted- and that is the end. Nothing is sent back to the governors. The premise of the OP is based on a process that does not exist.

[DeminPennswoods]

36. That's not what I got from what Jamie Raskin

said on Maddow's show last night.

[sarisataka]

38. I believe he was referring to a scenario

Where a state submits two different lists of electors, one from the governor and one from the legislature.

The OP seems to be referring to a challenge to votes submitted by a state, not two different lists.

In either case, it does not get referred back to the governor. The law says the list submitted by the "executive" should prevail if agreement cannot be reached, which is interpreted though not tested in court as the Certificate of Ascertainment signed by the governor.

[Kablooie]

22. If there is a way to challenge the electors, it will be challenged.

Luckily it won't go anywhere but that doesn't seem to bother them.
They will fling out challenges just to cause more confusion Which they seem to love.

[NutmegYankee]

23. It never goes to the governor's.

The governor “veto” is a provision if a state has sent in two slates of electors. Both houses of Congress vote on which to accept. If they disagree, the set certified by the governor is accepted.

This challenge is separate and relies on both houses agreeing to toss a states electoral votes. I suspect neither house will agree, certainly not the house.

[634-5789]

26. Won't happen.

After Monday, when the electorals are in and final, there's not enough traitors to take down the votes of the actual people. Rest easy, we're 39 days away from rescuing Democracy from the jaws of the Orange Traitor and his minoins.

[beachbumbob]

28. I hate all this handwringing, exactly what trump and Miller wants us to do

[StarfishSaver]

31. The House and Senate don't have to come to agreement

If there's an objection, each chamber votes on whether to accept the results. Unless BOTH chambers vote to reject the results, the Electoral College vote is accepted.

[treestar]

34. An education in the process

Usually we get the results on Election Night and ignore the rest of it - the certifications, the safe harbor, the actual EC meeting and the Congressional Certification in January. We take it all for granted. Now we have Trump and Republicans who are trying to undermine our system and our election to the point of using these usually rubber stamp issues to see if they can cause an upset.

[onenote]

37. Here is how I expect it to play out on January 6, step-by-step

The House and Senate will convene in a joint session to count the electoral votes, alphabetically, state-by-state. When they get to Arizona, a member of the House (Mo Brooks?) will seek to be recognized by Pence, who will be presiding over the count. This republican member will announce that he has an objection to counting Arizona's votes. He will present that objection in writing, joined by a republican Senator (Cruz?). (It could be the other way around, with a senator raising the objection, joined by a house member). While there isn't supposed to be any argument made at this time, Brooks or Cruz (or whichever Republican raises the objection) will start making a long winded speech. Pence should gavel it down, but he won't.

Eventually, however, Pence will suspend the joint session and direct the House and Senate to convene separately (which will entail all of the Senators getting up and going across the Capitol to the Senate floor) to debate and vote on the objection. The debate is limited to two hours, with each speaker limited to five minutes. In the House, the Republicans will easily find at least a dozen speakers to ramble on. Whether the Democrats choose to offer rebuttal or just let the House Republicans waste time is unclear. But well over an hour will be spent before the House votes to reject the objection. The same process will go forward in the Senate, although I suspect fewer Senators will be willing to publicly speak in favor of the objection. Then the Senate will vote and, despite having a slim majority (on January 6 it is likely that the winners of the Georgia election will not have been certified so there will be 50 Republicans and 48 Democrats), I predict the objection also will fail in the Senate. But even if it doesn't fail in the Senate, the fact that the House rejected it is enough to kill the objection.

The Senators then will traipse back to the House, the joint session will reconvene and the count will start back up. This same process will then be repeated when the count reaches Georgia. Another hour or two wasted. Then Michigan. Then Nevada. At this point, after having dragged out the count for at least four hours (and possibly more), there will be no chance of enough EC votes being rejected to prevent Biden from reaching 270 (although it may be enough for Biden to have a majority of the votes that were accepted even if that number is less than 270). So maybe the republicans quit. But it wouldn't be a surprise if they keep it up, and raise objections to the Pennsylvania and Wisconsin votes (and maybe Nevada). If they do, they will string out the count for several additional hours, all for no reason than to grandstand and kiss Trump's fat ass.

Eventually, however, the count will be concluded and Mike Pence will be forced to announce to the world that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have been elected President and Vice President.