The two states directly involved in this ruling are Washington and New York. Both states have now been told by SCOTUS that their electors are BOUND to vote for the winner of the STATES Popular Vote results.
Both states are part of the compact to give the states Electoral Votes to the winner of the National Popular Vote, but they just went to court to FORCE their electors to vote for the STATES Popular Vote Winner.
10th Amendment for the win.
With some posters claiming that the electors can vote any way they want, it confirms the fact that we will soon have a democracy, where the popular vote rules.
As far as I am concerned, I don’t care if it was addressed in the Constitution, the way we have been doing it makes sense...OR no need for electoral system at all.
The small states should be pleased with this...and so should we ALL.
Even the commies were afraid to go there. It would negate even having elections.
This sounds like the state’s choice. So, if a state AGREES with faithless electors, would they be allowed with the state’s complicity?
The point is that the states each can decide how their electors have to vote. The states make their own rules so they can tell the electors that they have to vote for the one that wins the state’s popular vote, the national popular vote or even on a percentage basis if they want.
The constitution leaves it up to the individual states.
Interesting. I would have thought the opposite because the whole idea of the electoral college is to override a stupid decision by the voters. Or so I thought.
States plus D.C. with Bound Electors (the opposite of faithless electors). Bound electors MUST by state law vote for the winner of the popular vote IN THAT STATE.
Alabama, Mississippi, Alaska, Montana, Arizona, Nebraska, California, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Connecticut, North Carolina, Delaware Oklahoma, District of Columbia, Ohio, Florida, Oregon, Hawaii, South Carolina, Indiana, Tennessee, Maine, Vermont, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, Washington, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota & Wyoming.
Today’s SCOTUS opinion means states can penalize bound electors for attempting to go faithless.
Most of the state laws regarding Bound Electors require electors to vote for the candidate of the party that nominated the elector, or require the elector to sign a pledge to do so. Some go further: Oklahoma imposes a civil penalty of $1,000; in North Carolina, the fine is $500, the faithless elector is deemed to have resigned, and a replacement is appointed. In South Carolina, an elector who violates his or her pledge is subject to criminal penalties, and in New Mexico a violation is a fourth degree felony. In Michigan and Utah, a candidate who fails to vote as required is considered to have resigned, and a replacement is appointed.