States May Curb ‘Faithless Electors,’ Supreme Court Rules

From the New York Times, 6 July 2020, reported by Adam Liptak: “States May Curb ‘Faithless Electors,’ Supreme Court Rules”

Though many would think the US votes by popular vote and gerrymandering is the be-all-end-all insult of the party who has massaged the map to favor their own goals, in fact, we live in a political system where an Electoral College actually “votes” for the next President. If you haven’t been given knowledge this college of ‘representatives’ can vote for anyone they like, you might be interested in the article here. If you have been following the long storied history of the college, it is interesting where the SCOTUS is at in current case law.


Look at this map. If the ELECTORAL COLLEGE were to be ABOLISHED and those on the left want. Then ALL OF THE GRAY AREAS WOULD NOT HAVE ANY SAY IN WHO THE NEXT PRESIDENT WOULD BE. All of the areas in BLUE also just happen to have the MOST POPULATION IN THE COUNTRY. And our FOUNDERS KNEW THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN. And that is why they made the ELECTORAL COLLEGE so that EVERY STATE WOULD HAVE A SAY IN WHO IS PRESIDENT NO MATTER WHAT. And yes even the states with a lot less populations than the larger ones.


Tonight on the news there was a “spot” informing that the Electoral College is who determines who wins. … more like a PSA picking up the slack for those who are not aware.

1 Like

All I ask of folks to come away with is: it is only recently that the SCOTUS has ruled our Electoral College delegates show fidelity to the voters of their given region of representation. In the recent past, delegates have voted their mind regardless of the desire/will of the voting population Penalties have been very slight indeed. So, @Reloader54 's point is cautionary. If not for this, imagine the tyranny of a country run only by the interests and perspective of the largest population centers. Yet, even today, we still have matters of loyalty to the people of every individual region in our country, which need resolving.

What is the implication of the ruling on 2020 outcome, and on potential violence by the perpetually offended?

This Supreme Court decision just seems so logical. It is without any question the correct determination. In 2016 approximately 2 million voted for Trump (1.8 million) and about 1 million voted for Hillary in the state of MO. As our state population voted 2 to 1 for Pres Trump, there would have been an uprising had the Electors decided “screw it” we are voting for Hillary anyway. It is rare that the US Supreme Court rules 9-0 on anything. All the justices could clearly see how stupid deciding the other way would have been!

1 Like

Actually, the reason for the electoral college was because New York and Virginia were the most populous then, and the smaller states would have had no voice in presidential elections.