Top Conservative Think Tank Vows to Make it 'Extraordinarily Difficult' for Dems to Replace Biden By Filing... Lawsuits"

[Ms. Toad]

60. Well, that is extremely premature. You can't replace someone who has not yet been named.

Until after the convention (or such other means by which the Democratic party chooses its nominee), Biden isn't being replaced - because he is not yet named. I have not heard anyone suggest waiting until after the convention to dump Biden. All of the discussion - and the multiple threads on this topic (including the discussion in this thread) is focused on switching candidates now, before the convention - and people engaged in the discussion are using "replacing" Biden as if naming a different person at the convention (or before) is "replacing" him. It's not, from the perspective of the applicable laws.

But that is what the scary laws being cited address - an after-convention switch.

As for Ohio, the law is effective on the date it needs to be in order for the Democratic Party to submit its candidate after the convention. There is no leeway for error, however, since it becomes effective on the new due date for the party's nomination: September 1. It is not necessary to hold a remote roll call, but given the tight timing it is certainly not unreasonable.

And I'm not disputing that there will be litigation this election season.

What I'm addressing is the repeated inappropriate use in this thread - and many others - to refer to the scenario currently being discussed - naming a candidate other than Biden at the convention (or via an earlier roll call vote) - as a scare tactic against those who believe Biden should step aside. As I said, I haven't heard a single person suggesting waiting until after the convention to name someone else (which is when the statutes regarding changing a candidate might have an impact.