SCOTUS: No faithless electors

[Loki]

Faithless electors. What an oxymoron.

[taiwan_girl]

To me, the decision makes sense.

[Mik]

I can't imagine it could be any other way. Should think electors would be required by federal law to reflect the votes cast.

[Copper]

I can imagine a scenario where you would want to allow the electors to change their vote.

If the president-elect became sick or dead you might want to change. Back when it took several days to get a message across the country you might want to let electors change.

These days it is probably less important.

[jon-nyc]

This seems like a good outcome. Can you imagine in a close election if an elector decided to 'make history' or even take a bribe?

[Horace]

I guess a righteous or mentally ill person might be motivated to make history, but the bribe seems less likely. The cost of being a social pariah to the whole culture would seem like a thing that couldn't be compensated for by any amount of money.

[jon-nyc]

You'd only be a pariah to half. To the other half you'd be a hero.

But yeah, you might need to move to Switzerland all the same.

[Horace]

No, someone who was known to have abdicated their duty to the voters would be considered a pariah by all the voters for the other side and I daresay most of the voters for the side they favored. You can be forgiven for disagreeing though, considering the White House adults in the room who bragged to the whole country via NYT op ed and a published book that they were subverting the President's intentions, and the left's almost unanimous cheering.

[Loki]

9-0 decision is about as strong a rebuke as possible. Happy to see they could all agree on something these days.

[Horace]

@George-K said in SCOTUS: No faithless electors:

The issue arose in lawsuits filed by three Hillary Clinton electors in Washington state and one in Colorado who refused to vote for her despite her popular vote win in both states. In so doing, they hoped to persuade enough electors in states won by Donald Trump to choose someone else and deny Trump the presidency.

I just now read the whole story. Yes, not surprisingly, the issue is one of righteousness, by left-leaning folk. While the left fantasizes about pro-Trump electors stealing the election in 2020, their side already tried to steal the election through those means in 2016.