Posted on 10/29/2020 3:18:04 PM PDT by doug from upland
Special Provisions In Rare Case Where Election of Electors is Under Contest
14. Federal law contains two provisions that become effective if for some reason the proclamation by the Governor declaring the names of the newly-elected electors is delayed.
The first provision says that if in any state the November election does not result in the election of electors, then the electors may be appointed “in such manner as the legislature of such State may direct.” 3 UCS § 2 The second provision says that if a state has in place before the November election a procedure for making a final determination in any contest of the election of electors, and the determination under that procedure is made at least six days before the December meeting of electors, then the determination “shall be conclusive.” 3 USC § 5
15. The North Carolina General Assembly in 2001, in response to these federal law provisions and in reaction to the election problems in Florida in 2000, passed a statute governing the selection of electors in a case where the Governor has not by proclamation named electors. In Florida, court challenges to the election result made it appear that the election of the electors might not be finalized in time for the meeting of the Electoral College. North Carolina’s statute, GS 163-213, provides:
If, by the sixth day before the electors are to meet, the election of electors has not been certified by the State Board of Elections (or for some other reason the Governor has not issued the proclamation declaring the names of the electors), then the General Assembly, meeting in special session, may name the electors. If for any reason the General Assembly has not done so by the day before the electors are to meet, then the Governor may name the electors. In any case in which the General Assembly or the Governor are naming the electors, then they are to name electors “in accord with their best judgment of the will of the electorate, and that judgment is not subject to judicial review.”
Voting by Electors; Obligation to Vote for Party’s Candidate
16. At the meeting of the electors, each elector votes separately for President and Vice-President. U.S. Constitution Amendment XII
17. By the fact of not resigning, each elector is consenting to vote for the candidates of the political party which nominated the elector (or the unaffiliated candidate who nominated the elector). GS 163-210
18. If an elector refuses to vote for the candidate of his or her party (or unaffiliated candidate), that refusal constitutes a resignation from the office of elector. A vacancy is created and is to be filled by the process described above. GS 163-212 Reporting the Votes of North Carolina’s Electors
19. After voting, the electors count the votes and make up certificates. 3 USC § 9
20. The electors distribute the certificates:
one to the President of the United States Senate (that is, the sitting Vice-President of the United States); two to the North Carolina Secretary of State; two to the Archivist of the United States; and one to a federal judge for the district that includes Raleigh. 3 USC § 11
This almost happened in Florida in 2000. I had contacted the State Speaker of the House. His office said they were prepared to hold an emergency session and, since GOP controlled, they would award the electors. In that case, however, the Supreme Court put an end to the folly of Gore cherry picking only certain counties to get more votes.
In NC, the State Board of Elections is under Dem control. Perhaps even in an unresolved dispute they would certify the election. That would certainly lead to a lawsuit and could end up in the Supreme Court. The NC Supreme Court is 8 Dems and 7 Republicans.
If the GOP controlled legislature in either or both PA and NC give the winning number of electors to Trump, could you imagine the rioting in the streets?
This is why we need to win big.
Anything close =chaos.
Never been a time when the entire opposition party are looking at treason convictions and death. They’ll do anything to bring down the country when Trump wins.
Praying for conclusive Trump landslide.
Definitely cannot count on SCOTUS with scoundrels like Roberts and Kavanaugh helping the RATS—and Amy still not participating in any cases.
Yep. Same in PA, MI, and I think WI. All the states where there might be shenanigans have R legislatures that would certify Trump the winner (assuming he won) and send the slate in.
Amy did not participate in previous case because she just got there and had not participated in arguments.
I posted yesterday about PA. Was about to research MI and WI. Would any of those legislatures have the guts to give electors to Trump based on massive voter fraud by the Dems? I think it N. Carolina that is not even pretending to check whether signatures match and when envelopes are thrown out, there is no way to check.
Hope that Amy will quickly get involved, but fear that she, Gorsuch, Alito and Gorsuch will be overridden by Roberts, Kavanaugh, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan.
Kavanaugh seems to be intimidated a la Roberts.
SCOTUS is gonna decide this one...either with a specific ruling or by refusing to review a ruling from one,or more,lower courts.
Bingo, TigerClaws.
The maximum penalty for voter fraud and RICO is a whole lot less than the maximum penalty for treason.
LS, how about following me back on Twitter :)
@DCCogan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.