(Washington) — The Supreme Court unanimously decided on Monday that states could require presidential electors to uphold their state’s popular vote winners in the electoral constituency.
Just four months before the 2020 elections, the ruling enacted legislation in 32 states and the District of Columbia that constrained voters to vote for a popular vote winner.
So-called dishonest voters were not important to the outcome of the presidential election, but it may change in competition determined by the voting of a few electors. You need 270 electoral votes to win the president.
The Court of Justice of Elena Cagan wrote that the state could “instruct electors that there is no justification for canceling the votes of millions of citizens.” That direction is in line with the Constitution-and here, in line with the state’s belief that our people rule. “
Justice was scheduled for spring so that the issue could be resolved before the election, not in the potential political crisis after the country voted.
When the court heard the debate over the phone in May due to the outbreak of the coronavirus, the judges caused fear of bribery and confusion if electors could vote regardless of the popularity vote results in the state.
The issue arose in a lawsuit filed by three Hillary Clinton electors in Washington and one elector in Colorado. In doing so, they wanted to convince enough electors in the state that Donald Trump won, choose someone else, and reject the president.
The Federal Court of Appeals in Denver ruled that electors were free to vote and rejected the claim that they had to choose the winner of the popular vote. In Washington, the State Supreme Court has fined three electors for $ 1,000 and rejected their claims.
In 2016, there were a total of 10 distrusted voters, including the fourth in Washington, Democratic voters in Hawaii, and two Republican voters in Texas. In addition, Democratic electors who said they would not vote for Clinton were replaced in Maine and Minnesota.
The closest margin to electoral colleges in recent years was in 2000, when Republican George W. Bush received 271 votes against 266 Democratic Al Gore votes. An elector in Washington DC left the ballot blank.
The Supreme Court played a decisive role in the election, ending a recount in Florida where President Bush secured a 537 vote margin from 6 million votes.
The Justice Department scheduled separate arguments in the Washington and Colorado cases after Judge Sonia Sotomayor sooner or later escaped from the Colorado case because he knew one of the plaintiffs.
When requesting the Supreme Court that states could require states to vote for winners in the elections, Colorado urged the Department of Justice not to wait until “the heat of the close presidential election.”
Get the Political Newsletter. Sign up to receive the most important political stories of the day from Washington and beyond.
Thank you very much!
For your safety, we have sent a confirmation email to the address you entered. Click the link to confirm your subscription and start receiving our newsletter. If you do not get confirmation within 10 minutes, check your spam folder.
