Why aren't Republicans filing lawsuits against interstate compacts to evade the Electoral College?

[Blackrook]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

What specific part of the Constitution does it violate?

 

[Obiwan]

They are probably letting it ride because the only states doing it are blue states that they would never carry under the old system...

With this new trend, the Republicans now have a chance to take the EC votes from the Democrats by just getting the popular vote...

They can't lose, and could possibly pull off a win due to the Democrats' stupidity!!!

 

[Meister]

There isn't enough support of other states to let it fly.
If there was, then the courts would be involved.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

It's not "ripe" for litigation. No one has suffered harm or has a substantial certainty of suffering harm.

Patience, grasshoppah.

.

 

[Edgetho]

Pretty sure The Constitution gives The States the exclusive right to determine how they cast their electoral votes.

The Constitution only protects minorities in States that allows the general population to vote.

I keep telling you folks this -- Voting is a privilege NOT a right.

SCOTUS has ruled on it. In Bush v. Gore.

If the States want to piss their votes away, under our system they have that right. It's up to the People of that State to fix the problem.

And if you look, none of those particular State are what what you'd call 'Free States' anyway. They're all dimocrap States every General Election. No loss

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

What specific part of the Constitution does it violate?

It requires the consent of Congress.

Explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is required when the underlying compact is "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States."
Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433 (1981)

.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

What specific part of the Constitution does it violate?

It requires the consent of Congress.

Explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is required when the underlying compact is "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States."
Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433 (1981)

.

That has nothing to do with the will if voters

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Pretty sure The Constitution gives The States the exclusive right to determine how they cast their electoral votes.

The Constitution only protects minorities in States that allows the general population to vote.

I keep telling you folks this -- Voting is a privilege NOT a right.

SCOTUS has ruled on it. In Bush v. Gore.

If the States want to piss their votes away, under our system they have that right. It's up to the People of that State to fix the problem.

And if you look, none of those particular State are what what you'd call 'Free States' anyway. They're all dimocrap States every General Election. No loss

States can piss their votes away if they want, that is true.

They just can't enter into a compact with other states to do it without explicit congressional consent.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Where's the push back on this?

It is clearly unconstitutional for a state to nullify the will of its own voters in favor of the results of a national election.

What specific part of the Constitution does it violate?

It requires the consent of Congress.

Explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is required when the underlying compact is "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States."
Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433 (1981)

.

That has nothing to do with the will if voters

Right. That's not what we're talking about.

States can't enter into a compact like that without congressional consent. The only issue the SCOTUS has to decide is whether such a compact requires explicit consent or implied consent.

I would argue that such an agreement "intervenes with the just supremacy of the United States" and therefore, requires explicit congressional consent.

.