General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe 12th Amendment of the US Constitution
Reads clear as day to me; I'm not a lawyer and only have the education from my 9th grade Civics and 11th grade US Government classes in high school to lean on.
I see NOTHING in here that says or even implies the Vice President has the ability to reject the vote or unilaterally elect the President.
The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxii
Response to Best_man23 (Original post)
BusterMove This message was self-deleted by its author.
Backseat Driver
(4,392 posts)Save for what the Electoral College Act may outline, I might see some sort of twist in which the VP might sustain a certification "under protest" and return the certified ballot from their state to the state for a recount within a specified number of days as requested by one of the candidates (apparent loser). However, what it would seem to that state in the face of truly MASSIVE fraud via the means of advanced technology (machines) or other quasi agency of the federal level (USPS)? would have been filed litigation long before, if not simultaneously, to the period of peaceful transition upon VPs certification of the electoral college. I do see some problem with a really bad situation, say another hurricane Katrina, in which the state could not finance that recount in a timely fashion, but who then would decide/then pay (a re-insurer for FDIC so a House written purse-string bill agreed to by Senate, vote to allow Treasury to pay it)? - SCOTUS? The outgoing incumbent federal admin/campaign? Right..........welcome PAC and Foundation grifts! Alternate College electors other than those chosen and approved in the state would seem IRRELEVENT to PLAINLY ILLEGAL at the Constitutional Date of certification by the VP.
I do believe without doubt that TFG was told he lost, and there was NO way for the VP to interrupt the Constitutional processes that would install that period of ultimate transition. CLEAR AS DAY! All the rest from Meadows, Eastman, Guiliani - planners of TFG chaos coup of 1/6. All participating need be accountable for at the very least seditious manipulation of ROL!