America's Next Authoritarian Will Be Much More Competent

[PatrickforO]

14. I am not a legal scholar, and it depends on how the attack on its constitutionality is set forth.

I actually looked into this to formulate this answer. This link is my source: https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-xii/interps/171

My take on this thing, now that I've read this, is that the Constitution is silent on the relationship between the states and the electors, EXCEPT to say that states shall choose the electors. Nothing about the criteria of choice though - but we get one for each representative and our two US Senators, but the legislators themselves cannot be electors.

So, how the states choose the electors is the crux here. The precedent set is that several states, like my own state of Colorado, take a 'winner take all' approach where the electors are obligated to vote with the majority of voters in Colorado, not the nation.

This link has a really good state by state discussion on this issue: https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/the-electoral-college.aspx.

After reading the two links above, my own opinion (and I'm an economist as opposed to being a lawyer or judge) is that the states can tell the electors to vote the way the state legislature says to vote. But, of course, I might well not be correct on this, particularly with today's post RBG Supreme Court.

Note that the NCSL link has a link to the National Popular Vote initiative for further discussion.

Sorry I couldn't be definitive here, but again, I was a staunch supporter of getting NPV signed into law in Colorado, and Colorado voters in fact upheld that November 3, which gratified me no end. The Electoral College is a holdover from slave days that should not be continued. But again, that is my opinion.

I believe this WILL be challenged in court when enough states pass it to circumvent the 12th Amendment.

Cheers!