They are asking for a racial/political division of electoral votes.
” The Supreme Court, however, has
made clear the government may not dilute the votes of political or racial minorities by wasting
their votes in at-large, multi-member elections in which the majority is likely to run the table.”
Isn't that what the 17th amendment did to the Senate, which was previously also determined by the state legislatures just like with the Electoral College?
Lmo56 wrote: This way, minority-dominated district’s votes count...
Why should it matter when the people don't vote for the President, the states do?
unlearner cited: “This violates the constitutional principle of ‘one person, one vote’ under the Fourteenth Amendment” “In addition to these constitutional violations, Texas’s WTA law violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because it results in Hispanics and African-Americans ‘hav[ing] less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.’”
The problem with this thought is that it supports the discarding of federalism and the conversion of the United States of America into Factional America. The Electoral College is to the Executive branch what the Senate was to the Legislative branch. If we hadn't drifted so far from the original intention of federalism, this wouldn't be an issue, as there would be no votes to be suppressed.
In federalism, the states are the sovereign government entities of the people. The federal government exists to manage interstate and collective state vs foreign interests. The federal government was never meant to involve itself in the daily lives of the people; that was the role of the state legislatures and the governors.
In federalism, the people voted directly for their representatives in the House, and the state legislatures voted for their representatives in the Senate. Furthermore, the legislatures voted on how to choose electors to the Electoral College for selecting the President of the Executive branch of the federal government, since the federal government was there to serve the state governments as the state governments served the people. The people vote for their state legislators in part based on whom they support for the Senate.
The 17th amendment destroyed federalism in Congress by disconnecting the Senators from the body they represent, that is, the states. There was a symmetry to the people voting for state legislators and federal representatives, and then state legislators in turn vote for Senators. Congress then represents the interests of the people via the House, and the interests of the states via the Senate.
Lawsuits like this and ploys like the National Popular Vote movement are attempts to destroy federalism in the Executive, by bypassing the sovereignty of states and subordinating their unique votes to the will of the population-at-large.
The people were never intended to vote directly for the President, as the President was there to resolve interstate disputes and represent foreign policy collectively for the states. Today, federalism is upside-down. The Senate represents the federal parties first, and the states last. The President serves narrow special-interest groups of the people first, and the states last.
Bypassing the Electoral College through schemes like the National Popular Vote movement or attempts to strip states of their constitutional authority to choose, are a power play by special interests of people to take the selection of the President away from the states and give it to the powerful few, using the ruse of "one person, one vote" as the lure.
-PJ
Which, again, can be defeated by the provision that the states get to choose the manner of selecting their electors.