We’ve been through this a hundred times.
On Dec. 14 the elector slates must be transmitted to the US Senate and Archivist. Thus they must be certified at some point before that.
There are no stated penalties for not transmitting, except for the state’s Secretary of State (a minor fine). While in most cases the Secretary of State “certifies” the count, a STATE LEGISLATURE may transmit the electors names regardless. There is nothing in the Constitution or the statutory law about how and when electors must be certified before that transmission date. If there is, I missed it.
It is the legislature’s job, and only the legislature’s, to transmit the elector slate. The governors play no role, except that the Secretary of State is under their executive branch.
If a goofball governor such as Witless Protection transmitted her own competing slate, the Senate would ignore it. Yes. Yertile would throw this out faster than a Milli Vanilli greatest hits album.
If, for some reason, a slate is NOT sent on time, both the Senate and the US Archivist may demand it (but no teeth in this). However, statute law says that a Federal court in the state may also demand it. Now you’re talking contempt, etc.
Is there an example of a state that didn’t transmit? The Confederate states had not yet withdrawn from the Union by Nov. 1860 and their electors all went to other people. I haven’t looked into the actual senate count, so I don’t know if elector slates were ever actually sent from South Carolina, Georgia, etc.
Since the requirement is that all electors shall be counted on the same day, my guess is if some state was withholding electors, the president would be elected from those whose slates were submitted, but this is murky. Some say it must be 435, others say it is a majority of those submitted.
Regardless, I don’t think it will go that far. Both the pressure from the US Senate, the courts, and most of all, the state legislatures in MI, PA, and WI which are red would all see that “a” slate is submitted.
So, the short answer is, No, the Dems cannot “likely certify their respective state’s vote for Biden.”
This is good info, thank you.
Let me be a little clearer. To be sure "Each state shall appoint, in such a manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors," is what governs. And, to be sure, Gov Wolf submitted the Republican slate of PA electors to the Senate archivist in 2016, when the margin was very close (and I suspect fraud in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and other Dem strongholds was jacked).
What many of us are envisioning in 2020 closer election driven by Dem fraud...lots of late ballots, some "found" ballots etc. In PA, that vote is certified by the Dem Boockvar. Let's say that despite many egregious example of Dem fraud, Boockvar certifies for because, ya know, we don't have time to investigate every claim of a problem by the "clearly partisan Trump camp".
In that case, I would HOPE the legislature steps in...the legislatures are R in 29 States, including PA, MI, and split in MN and Alaska - here is the map.
My point is, Wolf certified at close but uncontested vote in 2016. If it is close and ugly, Boockvar may cert for Biden even if there are shenanigans and the Legislature doesn't do its job (PA's Legislature hasn't always had a backbone). But if Trump wins by, say, 2%, it shouldn't get there.
That's why this is no year to stay at home and just assume Trump will destroy Biden, though the oil slip was gold.