No, it would devolve to the state legislature, which ultimately is the body that appoints electors. All the disputed states except Nevada are Republican dominated state legislatures
Seems like it. Now, the PA General Assembly is not going to ignore the popular vote of the PA. PA since the very first election in 1788 has held a popular vote to choose electors. It’s part of their tradition. However, if the courts determine that the entire election (in PA) can’t be trusted, then there are provisions for a re-vote on state/federal level down ballot items, but the presidency is different than all those other elections. The presidential popular election exists at the pleasure of the state legislature. If the popular vote does not exist, there is no structure for revoting: the day is set by federal statute as the first Tuesday in November. Without a popular vote, it goes directly to the state legislature to vote on. AFAIK there is NO legal basis for what to do next besides some foundational constitutional texts, and all they say is “the state legislatures choose the electors.” So, a simple majority in both houses would seem to do the trick.
But couldn't the state leg decide they want to hold a revote as their method of deciding new electors? I don't see a legal/constitutional reason they can't.
No, it would devolve to the state legislature, which ultimately is the body that appoints electors. All the disputed states except Nevada are Republican dominated state legislatures
Seems like it. Now, the PA General Assembly is not going to ignore the popular vote of the PA. PA since the very first election in 1788 has held a popular vote to choose electors. It’s part of their tradition. However, if the courts determine that the entire election (in PA) can’t be trusted, then there are provisions for a re-vote on state/federal level down ballot items, but the presidency is different than all those other elections. The presidential popular election exists at the pleasure of the state legislature. If the popular vote does not exist, there is no structure for revoting: the day is set by federal statute as the first Tuesday in November. Without a popular vote, it goes directly to the state legislature to vote on. AFAIK there is NO legal basis for what to do next besides some foundational constitutional texts, and all they say is “the state legislatures choose the electors.” So, a simple majority in both houses would seem to do the trick.
How do you know this?
This is what Mark Levin was talking about that got him kicked off Twitterbook.
What worries me is cucked Republicans going "Well, it seems like most people in PA wanted Biden so we're going to give him the electors".
I wonder if they could split their electors, 10 and 10?
Nah, Pennsylvania Republicans are tried and true warriors, they have been fighting this democrat machine for hundreds of years.
they already said they wouldn't intervene. deep state gonna deep state
The PA state legislature could even just not appoint electors at all if they don't have confidence in the legitimacy of this election.
Nobody gets to 270, then it goes to the house of representatives where each state would get 1 vote.
I don’t think they can decide to not choose electors. They could fail to appoint electors in time, but even that’s probably illegal.
But couldn't the state leg decide they want to hold a revote as their method of deciding new electors? I don't see a legal/constitutional reason they can't.