LogFAQs > #946374479

charmander6000 posted...

Not quite, the faithless elector would have to switch their vote from Biden to Trump (or vice versa) for it to matter. Them switching to some other person wouldn't matter as none of the candidates would have the 270 electoral votes needed to win (e.g. 269-268-1 result will still go to the house). An elector switching between the two major nominees has never happened, though I imagine there would be a lot of pressure from all sides.

Though considering the top three candidates in the electoral college are considered by the house, I imagine there will definitely be some faithless electors to try to give their secret choice (Sanders, a non-Trump Republican) a chance to be President.

Assuming it was done in a state with no laws regarding faithless electors the SC should uphold the vote. The constitution is quite clear that these electors decide who wins an election.

It's complicated. The SC ruled recently (in a ruling that was very disappointing to me) that a state can deselect an elector if he attempts to vote contrary to the winner of that state. I think it's also clear that a state is allowed to punish a faithless elector with jailtime or fines. But that doesn't necessarily mean that an electoral vote actually cast by a faithless elector in a state with laws against it would not count. It's also not clear that the SC has the jurisdiction to decide the question of what votes count (as opposed to how states may select electors) - the Constitution appears to give that solely to the new Congress.

It's sort of like the question of what happens if an excommunicated bishop ordains a new priest. Is the ordination valid? Is the new priest able to perform sacraments? What about if someone posing as a bishop ordains a priest and no one finds out for decades - have all the baptisms performed by that priest for decades actually been invalid?

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!