For Christ's sake - READ Bush v. Gore, SEC II B, paragraphs 1 and 2 ... It affirms the right of states to choose the method of selecting their electors - BUT PLACES 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION RESTRICTIONS ON THEM WHEN THEY GRANT THEIR CITIZENS THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR ELECTORS ...
READ IT - THEN TELL ME WHY 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION DOES NOT APPLY SINCE YOU BELIEVE THAT STATES HAVE AN INCONTROVERTIBLE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THE METHOD IN WHICH THEY SELECT THEIR ELECTORS ...
Good point - the statute may be found at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/statquery
AB 459.
The slate of electors representing the NPV winner is certified; they wouldn’t require electoral college winners to vote for the NPV winner.
Bush v. Gore does affirm the right for the legislature to choose the electors themselves in the case of electoral conflict. Although the statute states this cannot happen, a more recently passed law amends a previously passed law.
Yes, I see it now - if the Democrats lose the NPV but would have won the EV, a resident in a state that would flip its slate will claim lack of equal protection and sue. If the reverse happens and the case is brought by a Republican, they’ll say “Selected not elected.”