Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
pilight

Supreme Court says states can punish Electoral College voters

Recommended Posts

It was a per curiam decision, wasn't it? If so I guess the issue might be solved in a way which suits both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pilight said:

You are misinterpreting the ruling.  The electors have to honor the STATE’s popular vote winner, not the country’s.

99% of the time, this was happening already.  This just gives states the ability to punish “faithless electors” who choose the person they want instead of the person who won that state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

You are misinterpreting the ruling.  The electors have to honor the STATE’s popular vote winner, not the country’s.

99% of the time, this was happening already.  This just gives states the ability to punish “faithless electors” who choose the person they want instead of the person who won that state.

 

1 hour ago, pilight said:

Yeah, and states don't have to punish the faithless electors if they don't want to. However, the EC is pointless anyway, so lets just get rid of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pilight said:

Ummmmm... no. It just reinforces the idea that states get to chose how they assign their electors. If they wish to bind them, they are allowed to do so. This decision just upholds what has already been practiced.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of the EC was supposedly to be a check against the public electing someone unqualified, but with a talent for "low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity". With the electors no longer having the ability to go against the state's popular vote, that purpose is moot.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pilight said:

The point of the EC was supposedly to be a check against the public electing someone unqualified, but with a talent for "low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity". With the electors no longer having the ability to go against the state's popular vote, that purpose is moot.

The outcome of the 2016 election already proved that purpose moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, pilight said:

The point of the EC was supposedly to be a check against the public electing someone unqualified, but with a talent for "low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity". With the electors no longer having the ability to go against the state's popular vote, that purpose is moot.

To claim one purpose of the EC would not be accurate. Another major aim of the EC was to give individual states a voice in the Presidential election (to help appease the fears of smaller states who didn't want to be lorded over by the large states). Yes, some of the reasons for the EC have been eroded over the years (in large part due to the expanding ability for people to vote), but there are still others that remain (the large state-small state divide will always be a factor).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

To claim one purpose of the EC would not be accurate. Another major aim of the EC was to give individual states a voice in the Presidential election (to help appease the fears of smaller states who didn't want to be lorded over by the large states). Yes, some of the reasons for the EC have been eroded over the years (in large part due to the expanding ability for people to vote), but there are still others that remain (the large state-small state divide will always be a factor).

It was more to give southern states representation for 3/5 of their slave population without letting the slaves vote.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pilight said:

 

2 hours ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

It was a per curiam decision, wasn't it? If so I guess the issue might be solved in a way which suits both parties.

 

1 hour ago, Actinguy said:

You are misinterpreting the ruling.  The electors have to honor the STATE’s popular vote winner, not the country’s.

99% of the time, this was happening already.  This just gives states the ability to punish “faithless electors” who choose the person they want instead of the person who won that state.

 

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

 

Yeah, and states don't have to punish the faithless electors if they don't want to. However, the EC is pointless anyway, so lets just get rid of it. 

 

1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

Ummmmm... no. It just reinforces the idea that states get to chose how they assign their electors. If they wish to bind them, they are allowed to do so. This decision just upholds what has already been practiced.

This ruling is a VERY good case-and-point of why partisan- and ideologically-appointed Federal Justices (especially with the U.S. President being the nominator and the Senate confirming) has always been a bad idea, sabotaged the very concept of impartial judgement and true Constitutional review, and made all Supreme Court rulings suspect for integrity and reliability. This one is a pretty blatant example. Federal justices should be chosen by a committee of respected judicial emerita and legal scholars of high esteem who choose the members from among judges of lower courts with a defendable record of integrity, Constitutional understanding, and, most of all, impartiality in decisions in their courtroom. Partisan judges appointed as political and patronage appointments for party power grabs is frankly disgusting and corrupt, and makes a mockery of what the Supreme Court is supposed to be, as well as making every single ruling untrustworthy and suspect...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, pilight said:

It was more to give southern states representation for 3/5 of their slave population without letting the slaves vote.

The narrative that the EC was largely a product of the slave system is not an accurate one. While it could have played a role in it being instituted, there were large matters that had more influence over the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Patine said:

 

 

 

 

This ruling is a VERY good case-and-point of why partisan- and ideologically-appointed Federal Justices (especially with the U.S. President being the nominator and the Senate confirming) has always been a bad idea, sabotaged the very concept of impartial judgement and true Constitutional review, and made all Supreme Court rulings suspect for integrity and reliability. This one is a pretty blatant example. Federal justices should be chosen by a committee of respected judicial emerita and legal scholars of high esteem who choose the members from among judges of lower courts with a defendable record of integrity, Constitutional understanding, and, most of all, impartiality in decisions in their courtroom. Partisan judges appointed as political and patronage appointments for party power grabs is frankly disgusting and corrupt, and makes a mockery of what the Supreme Court is supposed to be, as well as making every single ruling untrustworthy and suspect...

Having a committee of legal experts chose judges seems good on the surface, but they would almost certainly fall into the same partisan differences that already plague the current process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, vcczar said:

However, the EC is pointless anyway, so lets just get rid of it. 

It's not, so let's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...