The Supreme Court has agreed to address a challenge to the Electoral College

Aerican Thinker ^ | 1/18/2020 | Andrea Widburg

[Governor Dinwiddie]

#13: "I have to wonder how Chief Justice Roberts will opine."

I don't trust him as far as I can spit.
 

[Parley Baer]

From the article:

“The Supreme Court will take up appeals in two cases - from Washington state and Colorado - involving electors who decided to vote in the Electoral College process for someone other than Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016 even though she won the popular vote in their states.

The justices will determine if such so-called faithless electors have the discretion to cast Electoral College votes as they see fit or whether states can impose restrictions including with penalties. The case is expected to be argued in April and decided by the end of June.:

[Starboard]

The RNC isn’t exactly on our side.

*************

What has the GOP ever done to reduce government spending and the size of government? The truth is that, despite what they tell us before every election, they love big government.

[NormsRevenge]

CJ Roberts has the same model of brain implant as Obammy and Biden.

[GrandJediMasterYoda]

I would LOVE to see the EC get repealed and then Trump wins the popular vote and they find out if the EC was still used their candidate would have won instead. Bwa ha ha ha!

[Starboard]

Thank you for that lucid and concise explanation.

[tired&retired]

“Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear a dispute involving the complex U.S. presidential election system focusing on whether Electoral College electors are free to break their pledges to back the candidate who wins their state’s popular vote, an act that could upend an election.”

[TribalPrincess2U]

The democrats ‘THINK’ way ahead. I would not be surprised if Roberts sells us out.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Thank you.

Blogs that run sensationalist headlines misrepresenting their content are extremely annoying. Especially because so many people apparently react to the wording of a headline without actually reading the article in question.

[FrdmLvr]

There is only one way the SC can find in this case. FOR the Electoral College. You can’t get any more constitutional that what’s spelled out in the constitution! This should end the controversy once and for all. I emphasize “should”.

[simpson96]

Thanks for that link.

[VRW Conspirator]

The Electoral College is unconstitutional. Everybody knows that. /s

[pawpawrick]

I wouldn’t be too sure. You know how the 4 libs will vote. Roberts will have to do what the democrat extortionists tell him to do. Like declare Obamacare constitutional.

[Malsua]

No electoral college: Voter Fraud anywhere = Voter Fraud everywhere.

This is the goal. Super Blue majorities can just rack up all the fraud they want, all the illegals, dead, etc. to control all future elections.

These dummies don’t realize you can vote yourself into it, but others will shoot their way out.

[Political Junkie Too]

The 12th amendment says this:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot ...and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The reasonable person has to assume that if the Electors were to "seal" the votes, this means it was meant to be kept secret until revealed at a joint session of Congress.

Why seal the votes if a state was to have an oversight on the results and a chance to negate? How could a state punish faithless Electors after the votes were revealed to a joint session of Congress at least a month later?

Any ruling from the Supreme Court could not possibly be relevant because the Constitution says that nobody knows the results of the Electoral College votes until they are opened in front of the entire Congress. At that point, there is no opportunity for a state or a court to intervene.

-PJ

[wastedyears]

The SCROTUS has no standing. It can only be removed or amended via an amendment.

Not that the SCROTUS cares about the Constitution.

[SkyDancer]

Seven cities or five states will then determine the presidency; rule by anarchy.

[StAnDeliver]

The hope here is SCOTUS took Cert on both bc Alito and/or Gorsuch expressed an interest to Roberts for:

• using Baca to express Constitutional limits on the "Interstate Voting Compact for Popular Vote Libtard Whingers and Weenies" on the record for 2020:

  Baca, (2).:"Does Article II or the Twelfth Amendment forbid a State from requiring its presidential electors to follow the State’s popular vote when casting their Electoral College ballots."

• block, ban, and/or punish Faithless Electors in Chiafalo.

[gundog]

Nah....if SCOTUS voided the whole thing, they’d void any authority they have to rule on law. Screw ‘em.

[a fool in paradise]

Ruth Buzzi G. is itching to overthrow the Constitution