Supreme Court Asked to Let ‘Faithless Electors’ Vote Their Own Way
3rd March 2020
In theory, a Supreme Court ruling allowing so-called “faithless electors” would add a new level of uncertainty to the race, with no guarantee the winner of the popular vote in a state would get the state’s full number of electoral votes.
Actually, that’s what the Founders intended. It was only the Progressive ‘let’s have more democracy!’ movement in the early part of the 20th century that changed things.
Last May, the Washington state Supreme Court held that the state could regulate the vote of an elector either directly or indirectly, upholding a $1,000 fine for the Clinton defectors. In August, a federal appeals court said a similar Colorado law was unconstitutional. Now, the Supreme Court will have its turn.