Could GOP states ignore voters and send Trump delegates to the Electoral College?

[IsItJustMe]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Politico

presidential election is about to take the stage: the Electoral College.

Normally, the Electoral College does its business performing the will of state voters in relative obscurity. But there is more scrutiny on the process this year because President Donald Trump and his allies have refused to concede the 2020 election. Critically, Trump allies urge going a step further, floating the idea that Republican-controlled state legislatures should ignore the vote for President-elect Joe Biden in their states and send Trump's slate of electors to the Electoral College instead.

But their theory vaguely waves away how the Electoral College actually works in practice, which stems from the Constitution, as well as from state and federal laws putting the constitutional text about the electors into practice.

“Just on the legal side, there’s pretty much impossible-to-overcome obstacles to" the idea of legislators overriding voters, said Adav Noti, chief of staff at the Campaign Legal Center and a member of the National Task Force on Election Crises…….


Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/know-electoral-college-works-093013464.html

---

We now know what their last ditch effort is. The question remains, can they get away with it?

This article is fairly in-depth and may provide some comfort for those of us who are in the WTF mode.

[paleotn]

1. Doubtful.

[IsItJustMe]

2. They would have to not only corrupt one state legislature,

but several of them. Not sure how many corruptible people are out there, but it does seem like a tall order.

[BlueNIndiana]

4. If he can get one state to do it others will follow

Michigan is he largest margin of loss and if that state i willing to do it will enourmous pressure on PA and Wisc


Wisc would be open to it i am sure as well

[Tommymac]

11. Um, what?

Spelling friend.

Besides, I disagree heartily with what I THINK you are trying to say.

PA State Rethuglican legislators have already stated they are not going to try to override the legal system. Not happening.

Reality bites for Rethugs and their sympathizers and enablers, doesn't it?

[paleotn]

19. Riiiight.

Umm, no.

[dware]

20. Not possible, as has been pointed out numerous times here in the last 24 hours.

MI law is very clear on this, the winner of the popular vote is the winner of the electoral vote, no if's, and's or but's about it and the R. leader of the MI legislature has said as much, the MI legislature will follow the MI law and they have no intention in getting involved in it.

PA R legislators have said the same thing.

[BumRushDaShow]

21. No.

MI, PA, and WI all have Democratic Governors and those Governors select the electors as presented to them by their Secretaries of State. The obscure federal law that the GOP keeps hanging their hats on is narrowly focused on "disputed elections" and in ALL of these cases, with the large margins (plus any audits/recounts as prescribed by state law), as well as certifications, there is no "disputed election" except in the minds of the conspiracy theorist loons.

[paleotn]

17. Exactly....

And state legislators tend to like their jobs. Even if some of them are part time. This would be way beyond the pale even for Rethuglicans.

[TDale313]

3. Probably not.

However, if Trump’s antics cause enough delays and issues, and enough states don’t certify, there’s a chance it could end up in the House. And because of the way that gets handled, that would likely go to Trump. But I doubt either option is anywhere close to likely. I am more concerned that this precedent means we’ll go through this with nearly every Presidential election. This one’s essentially done. But they’ll learn from this.

[Bayard]

5. Per the article,

The die has already been cast. Each state has already legally bound themselves to the process on Nov. 3, and changing it at this late date would require changing laws. Even then, it would be extremely prohibitive.

In other words--ain't gonna happen!

[Voltaire2]

6. yes they could

saying they can't because 'the constitution' is laughable.

They do it. It ends up at the Supremely Fucked Up Court, and at least 5 fascist asshats say: "looks good to me". Done.

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. And if SCOTUS were to say "looks good", governors would say "fuck right off"

SCOTUS has no enforcement mechanism to stop governors from appointing the appropriate slate of electors per federal and state laws, and so enforcement would devolve to the “you and what army?” Scenario. Once a slate has been appointed and sent to congress for certification, SCOTUS has no jurisdiction over the internal processes of congress, due to separation of powers.

If, by chance, two competing slates were sent by a state, the slate appointed by the governor takes precedence, by law.

SCOTUS will not touch this issue with a one thousand and ten foot pole, and risk being rendered impotent and irrelevant.

[Tommymac]

13. +100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

This. Getting tired of those who are not educated in the law trying to push what they 'think' the law is or says.

Just creates more unneeded anxiety for the uninformed.

President-elect Joe Biden and Vice-President -elect Kamala Harris WILL be sworn in on Jan 20 2021.

This crap going on right now re the election results is all Kabuki covering up Killer Clown's REAL $$$$ steal that is actually occuring as I type.

[judesedit]

7. And, if it did, the unions said they'd shut down the country

and I'm pretty sure the majority of our country would go along with it. We must get rid of these imposters and build back better.

[Fiendish Thingy]

8. FFS, THIS. WILL. NOT. HAPPEN.

For the elebenty-jillionth time, I post these links here:

http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2020/09/state-legislatures-cannot-act-alone-in.html

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e70e52c7c72720ed714313f/t/5f625c790cef066e940ea42d/1600281722253/State_Legislature_Paper.pdf

https://verdict.justia.com/2020/09/30/no-republicans-cannot-throw-the-presidential-election-into-the-house-so-that-trump-wins

[dware]

22. It gets tiring doesn't it.

I really wish people would bone up on the pertinent laws before spouting this crap.

[PSPS]

10. Not this shit again. This will not happen. This feature piece shouldn't even be in LBN.

[apnu]

12. No. Bob Bauer explained this very thing today. (Link here explaining why)

It is Constitutionally illegal on the federal level and state level of every state this idea has been floated. (And probably all the others also).

You can see a replay of Bob Bauer's comments on this and other things with this link: https://www.pscp.tv/w/1yoKMANBrZzKQ

[ancianita]

14. No. Bob Bauer says absolutely not. NO court would even accept ANY of Trump's justifications.

The legislators going to DC already know the law and won't do what Trump wants.

&feature=emb_title

[groundloop]

15. tRump is just angling for leverage to make a deal, that's all.

After reading this post I tend to agree and have come to believe tRump is just attempting to be such a huge pain in the ass that he can make a deal to walk away with no charges being filed. He's played that exact same game to walk away from huge debt.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100214587411#post14

[brooklynite]

16. Answer: no.

Was there another question?

[BumRushDaShow]

18. Re: The headline - Several of the states at issue are NOT "GOP states"

I.e., there are 3 of them that are "split" with Democratic Governors and GOP-controlled state legislatures (PA, MI, WI) and only 2 that are "GOP states", where the Governors and state legislatures are GOP-controlled (AZ and GA). And in the case of PA, the state Supreme Court is also majority Democratic.

[Omaha Steve]

23. After a review by forum hosts....LOCKING

This is opinion and analysis.

Statement of Purpose
Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.