RAMROD 117,004 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 (CNN)The Supreme Court said Monday that states can punish members of the Electoral College who break a pledge to vote for a state's popular vote winner in presidential elections. The case comes as the election season is heating up, putting the Electoral College once again front and center in an increasingly polarized and volatile political atmosphere. In 2016, 10 of the 538 presidential electors went rogue, attempting to vote for someone other than their pledged candidate. In all, 32 states and the District of Columbia have laws that are meant to discourage faithless electors. But until 2016, no state had ever actually punished or removed an elector because of his or her vote. In unanimous ruling, court says states can sanction electors who refuse to cast their vote in the Electoral College for the presidential candidate who won in their state. The vote count was 9-0. "Today, we consider whether a State may also penalize an elector for breaking his pledge and voting for someone other than the presidential candidate who won his State's popular vote. We hold that a State may do so," Justice Elena Kagan wrote. "The Constitution's text and the Nation's history both support allowing a State to enforce an elector's pledge to support his party's nominee -- and the state voters' choice -- for President," she added. Full articles at Source: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/06/politics/faithless-electors-supreme-court/index.html?__twitter_impression=true https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/3201564001?__twitter_impression=true (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ✧*:･ﾟ ᶠʳᵒⁿᵗ ᵗᵒʷᵃʳᵈ ᵉⁿᵉᵐʸ (*´艸｀*) ♡♡♡ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werk 13,166 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 @RAMROD This is good right? Or is it bad? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAMROD 117,004 Posted July 7, 2020 Author Share Posted July 7, 2020 7 minutes ago, Werk said: @RAMROD This is good right? Yes. There are electorals who pledges to Hillary in 2016 but voted Trump instead. Assuming this will go beyond fines, these Electoral folks will want to think twice before going rogue again. (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ✧*:･ﾟ ᶠʳᵒⁿᵗ ᵗᵒʷᵃʳᵈ ᵉⁿᵉᵐʸ (*´艸｀*) ♡♡♡ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanC 938 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 12 minutes ago, RAMROD said: Yes. There are electorals who pledges to Hillary in 2016 but voted Trump instead. Assuming this will go beyond fines, these Electoral folks will want to think twice before going rogue again. What would her count have been plus 10? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maleficent 6 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Thank god! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maleficent 6 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Just now, NathanC said: What would her count have been plus 10? 242 vs Trump's 296...still no contest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanC 938 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, Maleficent said: 242 vs Trump's 296...still no contest Poo lol hopefully our generation fix gerrymandering and get rid of the electoral college. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRCF29 8,230 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 24 minutes ago, RAMROD said: There are electorals who pledges to Hillary in 2016 but voted Trump instead. I don’t think that’s true. Faithless electors for both candidates voted for Kasich, Sanders, Spoted Eagle, Paul, and Powell I believe Don't Call Me Gaga Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRCF29 8,230 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 The Justices are right to interpret the Constitution this way, it left things like that up to states Don't Call Me Gaga Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.