Thanks, BP2, that's the same link I posted Lmo56. I'm still curious about Lmo56's assertion that "SCOTUS has previously affirmed these laws as Constitutional"
“Thanks, BP2, that’s the same link I posted Lmo56. I’m still curious about Lmo56’s assertion that SCOTUS has previously affirmed these laws as Constitutional”
****
ACTUALLY, I DO perform a bit of research before posting ...
Twenty-four states have laws to punish faithless electors. While no faithless elector has ever been punished, the constitutionality of state pledge laws was brought before the Supreme Court in 1952 (Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214).
The court ruled in favor of the state’s right to require electors to pledge to vote for their party’s nominee, as well as to remove electors who refuse to pledge.
Once the elector has voted, their vote can only be changed in states such as Michigan and Minnesota, where votes other than those pledged are rendered invalid.
However, in all twenty-four states, a faithless elector may only be punished after he or she votes.
The Supreme Court ruled that electors are acting as a function of the state, not the federal government, and therefore states have the right to govern electors. This is because all electors are elected via state elections on Election Day and meet in their respective state capitals which is usually the third Monday after the second Wednesday in December. The votes are then delivered to Congress which then tallys the votes.
The constitutionality of state laws punishing electors for actually casting a faithless vote, rather than refusing to pledge, has never been decided by the Supreme Court.
The laws have been affirmed - however, the PUNISHMENT has not since no Elector has EVER been punished ... so far.