Good people keep saying that having Senators contest Biden’s electors will work - WRONG!
The law clearly says that, if the Senate and House disagree about the slate of electors for a state, the electors submitted by governors are counted. In 2020, those are the Biden electors!
The Dem-controlled House will vote in lockstep for Biden electors. That means IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT THE SENATE DOES.
Don’t believe me? Read the law yourself. Third sentence from the bottom… https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/15
It’s a terrible law but it’s very clear and there’s no chance a court would overturn it.
I’m not a Doomer. Facts are not always friendly. Legal delusions are our enemy.
SUCCESS REQUIRES WINNING COURT CASES THAT DISQUALIFY BIDEN ELECTORS, PREFERABLY BEFORE JANUARY 6TH. THAT IS DOABLE. FOCUS ON THAT.
As a last resort, the GOP could try to create a Constitutional crisis, possibly by boycotting electoral confirmation hearings, to force the Supreme Court to get involved. But I expect they’ll be very involved before that.
If you’re interested, I posted a more detailed analysis at https://thedonald.win/p/11R4gfGcQ5/.
Because you agree with me, you're telling me to shut up? I'm confused.
Missed that. My bad.
Thanks man. We need to know the paths to victory and the dead ends.
Stay on the case and keep us posted, will ya?
Its funny how the left is complaining that biden electors have to vote for biden. When they are literally pushing the National Popular Vote act which will forced electors in the state that joined to vote for who ever won the popular vote. Damn. I’ve never seen a set of people whole constantly cry and whine.
There's still a path to victory by way of contested electors, but the margin of victory is small. Rush talked about it on his program yesterday: https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/12/16/the-turtle-is-determined-to-stop-the-one-long-shot-scenario-left-for-trump/
Read the US Constitution if supersedes both Federal & State law and all precedent's. Don't count on the Supreme Court or Congress to help President Trump. The US Constitution is on his side along with over 74 million Americans. When the Supreme Court said they would not here the case last week you knew where things were heading. They are as guilty of treason as the people running thru the same batch of Biden ballots 5 times.
The federal law I cited explicitly addresses how to deal with dueling slates of electors. It can't possibly violate anything in the Constitution because the Constitution, including its Amendments, does not acknowledge that dueling slates of electors are possible. After dueling slates of electors first occurred in 1876, the federal law was written to fill in gaps in the Constitution. See my more detailed analysis linked above for more info.
Not that it matters with the current SCOTUS, but that law is plainly violative of the Electors Clause.
That’s lovely, but you are citing to the Elections Clause.
The Electors Clause (a different clause, and the one I referenced) applies to the presidential election.
Instead of calling bullshit, try learning something.
First, I apologize. My search engine swapped words on me and I didn't notice.
More importantly, the federal law I cited, the one that explicitly states how to deal with dueling slates of electors, can't possibly violate anything in the Constitution because the Constitution, including its Amendments, does not acknowledge that dueling slates of electors are possible. The federal law clearly covers something that is not covered in the Constitution. So your original statement is incorrect.
I agree that the Biden electors were illegally selected because they were certified even though obvious fraud had occurred, but that's an entirely separate matter.
Sigh. Again, with the current cowards and leftists on SCOTUS, none of this matters.
However, a federal law may not grant the power to select electors to any body other than the respective state legislatures. The state legislatures themselves could defer to the governor, but could take back their power at any time.
The power to determine how to select electors always lies with the state legislatures themselves; it is a plenary power granted to them and no other body. The federal statute goes too far.
Saying that it is fine because the Constitution is “silent” on dueling slates of electors is akin to saying the federal government can pass a law that gives governors the right to choose electors if election day is a rainy day in parts of the respective states. The Constitution is silent on neither point; the rule is the legislatures choose, no one else, rain or shine, dueling electors or no.
The Constitution doesn't say state legislatures must select electors. It says that electors must be appointed in the manner that legislatures "direct". That's very different. Dueling electors arise because state legislatures write laws that delegate that responsibility to governors and it's a debatable matter of state law whether legislatures can rescind that delegation without changing state law first.
Ideally, these debatable matters would be resolved judicially before Jan 6th. Ideally, they would be resolved based on determining which general election votes were legal.
The federal law that addresses what happens if there are multiple slates of electors for states on Jan 6th does not say that Congress has the authority to select electors. It says that Congress has the responsibility to determine which set of electors is legally correct under state law. Sadly, nobody expects Congress to carefully determine that.
Interestingly, because the arbitrary tiebreaker rule can't account for what's legal under state law, it could be challengeable as unconstitutional. Hmm.
You would probably appreciate my more detailed analysis.
Yes, state legislatures may delegate to the governor (or select any manner of appointing electors they choose). The federal law may not take that from them, thus a federal law saying the governor chooses when there are dueling electors is unconstitutional on its face; it isn’t up to the feds.
And it is ‘t debatable as to whether state legislatures can rescind this power without changing state law. State legislatures have sole and plenary power to appoint electors. State nor federal law nor state constitutions alter this, per the Electors Clause. McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892).
I appreciate the engaging conversation. Everything about having the US Congress judge which electors were chosen legally under state law is sketchy. The federal law's mentioning of state law appears to be a nod to doing what the state legislature directed, but the tiebreaker flagrantly violates the Electors clause by favoring governors over state legislators. I hope the election doesn't come down to these non-fraud related arguments but I see that there's a possibility that they could result in a Trump victory. Cheers.