LogFAQs > #979184631

Toonstrack posted...

Theres a difference between having qualifications and being able to restrict citizens from voting for certain people.

What part of there is no federal requirement or right that you are able to vote for president at all did you not follow? Also, not being on the ballot does not prevent you from voting for them, it just means they aren't on the ballot. Now if they won without being on the ballot that would probably kick off a whole different legal question.

This is the entirety of what the Constitution has to say on the the mechanics of presidential election:

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."

It specifically enumerates that the State Legislature is entirely in charge of the manner in which Electors are appointed.

Do you think they made the wrong decision here?

In the strict terms of what the Constitution and Laws prescribe? Absolutely, this is completely legislation from the bench. With the Right having brought complete gridlock to Congress in the past 30 years they have continued to prey upon the unwritten norms that have held this Nation together because they know we are unable to actually pass any laws clarifying things and they have packed the SC enough to get a stamp when needed.