An Appeals Court actually gets one right!
Aug 21, 2019 16:27:35 #
Court: E*******l College members not bound by popular v**e
A U.S. appeals court in Denver said E*******l College members can v**e for the p**********l candidate of their choice and aren't bound by the popular v**e in their states.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the Colorado secretary of state violated the Constitution in 2016 when he removed an e*****r and nullified his v**e when the e*****r refused to cast his b****t for Democrat Hillary Clinton, who won the popular v**e.
It was not immediately clear what effect the ruling might have on the E*******l College system, which is established in the Constitution. V**ers in each state choose members of the E*******l College, called e*****rs, who are pledged to a p**********l candidate. The e*****rs then choose the president.
Most states require e*****rs to v**e for the candidate who won the popular v**e in that state, but the Denver appeals court said the states do not have that authority.
The Constitution allows e*****rs to cast their v**es at their own discretion, the ruling said, "and the state does not possess countervailing authority to remove an e*****r and to cancel his v**e in response to the exercise of that Constitutional right."
The e*****r at the center of the case, Micheal Baca, was part of a group known as "Hamilton e*****rs" who tried to convince e*****rs who were pledged to Clinton or Donald Trump to unite behind a consensus candidate to deny Trump the presidency.
After a flurry of filings in state and federal courts, the e*****rs met on Dec. 19, 2016, and Baca crossed out Clinton's name on his b****t and wrote in John Kasich, the Republican governor of Ohio who also ran for president.
Then-Secretary of State Wayne Williams refused to count the v**e and removed Baca as an e*****r. He replaced him with another e*****r who v**ed for Clinton.
Baca's attorneys said the U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the case because it conflicts with a decision from Washington state's Supreme Court. That court said in May that e*****rs could be fined for not casting b****ts for the popular v**e winner.
Colorado's current secretary of state, Jena Griswold, decried the ruling Tuesday in Colorado but did not immediately say if she would appeal.
"This court decision takes power from Colorado v**ers and sets a dangerous precedent," she said. "Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one v**e."
https://apple.news/AF19b8YdtQWKVXcZp8p5kFA
A U.S. appeals court in Denver said E*******l College members can v**e for the p**********l candidate of their choice and aren't bound by the popular v**e in their states.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the Colorado secretary of state violated the Constitution in 2016 when he removed an e*****r and nullified his v**e when the e*****r refused to cast his b****t for Democrat Hillary Clinton, who won the popular v**e.
It was not immediately clear what effect the ruling might have on the E*******l College system, which is established in the Constitution. V**ers in each state choose members of the E*******l College, called e*****rs, who are pledged to a p**********l candidate. The e*****rs then choose the president.
Most states require e*****rs to v**e for the candidate who won the popular v**e in that state, but the Denver appeals court said the states do not have that authority.
The Constitution allows e*****rs to cast their v**es at their own discretion, the ruling said, "and the state does not possess countervailing authority to remove an e*****r and to cancel his v**e in response to the exercise of that Constitutional right."
The e*****r at the center of the case, Micheal Baca, was part of a group known as "Hamilton e*****rs" who tried to convince e*****rs who were pledged to Clinton or Donald Trump to unite behind a consensus candidate to deny Trump the presidency.
After a flurry of filings in state and federal courts, the e*****rs met on Dec. 19, 2016, and Baca crossed out Clinton's name on his b****t and wrote in John Kasich, the Republican governor of Ohio who also ran for president.
Then-Secretary of State Wayne Williams refused to count the v**e and removed Baca as an e*****r. He replaced him with another e*****r who v**ed for Clinton.
Baca's attorneys said the U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the case because it conflicts with a decision from Washington state's Supreme Court. That court said in May that e*****rs could be fined for not casting b****ts for the popular v**e winner.
Colorado's current secretary of state, Jena Griswold, decried the ruling Tuesday in Colorado but did not immediately say if she would appeal.
"This court decision takes power from Colorado v**ers and sets a dangerous precedent," she said. "Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one v**e."
https://apple.news/AF19b8YdtQWKVXcZp8p5kFA
Aug 21, 2019 17:38:56 #
lpnmajor
Loc: Arkansas
The Critical Critic wrote:
b Court: E*******l College members not bound by p... (show quote)
Each State has different rules written into their State's Constitution. Some States assign all delegates v**es to the candidate who wins the popular v**e, some split their delegate v**es and some allow delegates to be "courted" who will v**e for whomever they choose.
Each State has different rules for how delegates are selected as well. In my State, for instance, v**ers do NOT select delegates, those slots are auctioned off by the State i.e., whoever donates the most money to the majority party will be selected.....................who are obligated to cast their e*******l v**e for whomever the Legislature tells them to. Here's how it worked; in 2016, my State announced for the Republican candidate...................after only 27% of the precincts had reported in. How were they able to get away with that? Simple, the GOP had a majority in the Legislature, so the outcome was determined before a single person cast a v**e.
Aug 21, 2019 17:55:22 #
The Critical Critic wrote:
b Court: E*******l College members not bound by p... (show quote)
That defeats the purpose! That is c*******m! They need to v**e our wishes not theirs
Aug 22, 2019 03:43:53 #
The decision could give a single e*****r the power to decide the outcome of a p**********l e******n — if the popular v**e results in an apparent E*******l College tie.
A federal appeals court ruled late Tuesday that p**********l e*****rs who cast the actual b****ts for president and vice president are free to v**e as they wish and cannot be required to follow the results of the popular v**e in their states.
The decision could give a single e*****r the power to decide the outcome of a p**********l e******n — if the popular v**e results in an apparent E*******l College tie.
"This issue could be a ticking time bomb in our divided politics. It's not hard to imagine how a single faithless e*****r, v****g differently than his or her state did, could swing a close p**********l e******n," said Mark Murray, NBC News senior political editor.
It hasn't been much of an issue in American political history because when an e*****r refuses to follow the results of a state's popular v**e, the state simply throws the b****t away. But Tuesday's ruling says states cannot do that.
The decision, from a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, is a victory for Micheal Baca, a Colorado Democratic e*****r in 2016. Under state law, he was required to cast his b****t for Hillary Clinton, who won the state's popular v**e. Instead, he crossed out her name and wrote in John Kasich, a Republican and then the governor of Ohio.
The secretary of state removed Baca as an e*****r, discarded his v**e and brought in another e*****r who v**ed for Clinton. In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court said the nullification of Baca's v**e was unconstitutional.
When v**ers go to the polls in p**********l races, they actually cast their v**es for a slate of e*****rs chosen by the political parties of the nominees. States are free to choose their e*****rs however they want, Tuesday's ruling said, and can even require e*****rs to pledge their loyalty to their political parties.
But once the e*****rs are chosen and report in December to cast their v**es as members of the E*******l College, they are fulfilling a federal function, and a state's authority has ended. "The states' power to appoint e*****rs does not include the power to remove them or nullify their v**es," the court said.
Because the Constitution contains no requirement for e*****rs to follow the wishes of a political party, "the e*****rs, once appointed, are free to v**e as they choose," assuming that they cast their v**e for a legally qualified candidate.
A total of 30 states have laws that bind e*****rs, requiring them to cast their v**es for whichever candidate won that state's popular v**e. But the laws are weak, providing only nominal penalties for what are known as "faithless e*****rs" who fail to conform to the popular v**e.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1952 that states do not violate the Constitution when they require e*****rs to pledge that they will abide by the popular v**e. But the justices have never said whether it is constitutional to enforce those pledges.
Legal scholars said Tuesday's ruling was the first from a federal appeals court on the issue of faithless e*****rs. It applies immediately to the six states of the 10th Circuit: Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
“This court decision takes power from Colorado v**ers and sets a dangerous precedent," said Jena Griswold, Colorado's secretary of state. "Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one v**e. We are reviewing this decision with our attorneys, and will vigorously protect Colorado v**ers.”
The federal court ruling conflicts with a decision from Washington state's Supreme Court in May, which said e*****rs must follow the results of the popular v**e. "The power of e*****rs to v**e comes from the state, and the e*****r has no personal right to that role,” the court said.
Lawyers from the nonprofit Equal Citizens, which represented the Washington state e*****rs and Baca in Colorado, said they will appeal the Washington ruling to the Supreme Court.
“We know E*******l College contests are going to be closer in the future than they have been in the past. And as they get closer and closer, even a small number of e*****rs could change the results of an e******n," said Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor who founded Equal Citizens and is part of its legal team. "Whether you think that’s a good system or not, we believe it is critical to resolve it before it would decide an e******n.”
If the Supreme Court chooses to take up the dispute, it would have time to rule on the issue before the E*******l College meets in December 2020 to cast the formal v**e for president.
https://apple.news/A58kZJ-7fRNeVyMP_KGemfA
A federal appeals court ruled late Tuesday that p**********l e*****rs who cast the actual b****ts for president and vice president are free to v**e as they wish and cannot be required to follow the results of the popular v**e in their states.
The decision could give a single e*****r the power to decide the outcome of a p**********l e******n — if the popular v**e results in an apparent E*******l College tie.
"This issue could be a ticking time bomb in our divided politics. It's not hard to imagine how a single faithless e*****r, v****g differently than his or her state did, could swing a close p**********l e******n," said Mark Murray, NBC News senior political editor.
It hasn't been much of an issue in American political history because when an e*****r refuses to follow the results of a state's popular v**e, the state simply throws the b****t away. But Tuesday's ruling says states cannot do that.
The decision, from a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, is a victory for Micheal Baca, a Colorado Democratic e*****r in 2016. Under state law, he was required to cast his b****t for Hillary Clinton, who won the state's popular v**e. Instead, he crossed out her name and wrote in John Kasich, a Republican and then the governor of Ohio.
The secretary of state removed Baca as an e*****r, discarded his v**e and brought in another e*****r who v**ed for Clinton. In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court said the nullification of Baca's v**e was unconstitutional.
When v**ers go to the polls in p**********l races, they actually cast their v**es for a slate of e*****rs chosen by the political parties of the nominees. States are free to choose their e*****rs however they want, Tuesday's ruling said, and can even require e*****rs to pledge their loyalty to their political parties.
But once the e*****rs are chosen and report in December to cast their v**es as members of the E*******l College, they are fulfilling a federal function, and a state's authority has ended. "The states' power to appoint e*****rs does not include the power to remove them or nullify their v**es," the court said.
Because the Constitution contains no requirement for e*****rs to follow the wishes of a political party, "the e*****rs, once appointed, are free to v**e as they choose," assuming that they cast their v**e for a legally qualified candidate.
A total of 30 states have laws that bind e*****rs, requiring them to cast their v**es for whichever candidate won that state's popular v**e. But the laws are weak, providing only nominal penalties for what are known as "faithless e*****rs" who fail to conform to the popular v**e.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1952 that states do not violate the Constitution when they require e*****rs to pledge that they will abide by the popular v**e. But the justices have never said whether it is constitutional to enforce those pledges.
Legal scholars said Tuesday's ruling was the first from a federal appeals court on the issue of faithless e*****rs. It applies immediately to the six states of the 10th Circuit: Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
“This court decision takes power from Colorado v**ers and sets a dangerous precedent," said Jena Griswold, Colorado's secretary of state. "Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one v**e. We are reviewing this decision with our attorneys, and will vigorously protect Colorado v**ers.”
The federal court ruling conflicts with a decision from Washington state's Supreme Court in May, which said e*****rs must follow the results of the popular v**e. "The power of e*****rs to v**e comes from the state, and the e*****r has no personal right to that role,” the court said.
Lawyers from the nonprofit Equal Citizens, which represented the Washington state e*****rs and Baca in Colorado, said they will appeal the Washington ruling to the Supreme Court.
“We know E*******l College contests are going to be closer in the future than they have been in the past. And as they get closer and closer, even a small number of e*****rs could change the results of an e******n," said Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor who founded Equal Citizens and is part of its legal team. "Whether you think that’s a good system or not, we believe it is critical to resolve it before it would decide an e******n.”
If the Supreme Court chooses to take up the dispute, it would have time to rule on the issue before the E*******l College meets in December 2020 to cast the formal v**e for president.
https://apple.news/A58kZJ-7fRNeVyMP_KGemfA
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.