The Future of the Presidential Election: US Supreme Court Decides Fate of Voting Process

The US Supreme Court will decide whether or not 538 members of the Electoral College should vote for the winners in their states. Writes about it USA Today.

Фото: Depositphotos

The Washington State Supreme Court ruled to impose fines of $ 1000 on three electors who voted in December 2016 for Colin Powell, and not Hillary Clinton, who won the state.

Never before have the uncertain tendencies of some members of the Electoral College decided the election results, so the influence of a higher court decision can be just mathematical. But the 2020 race between President Donald Trump and his possible Democratic opponent can be risky for such a decision.

“The court must resolve this conflict now, before it arises in the context of an election,” urged Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig on behalf of three Washington state voters. He noted that in 2016, 10 voters either went against the system or tried to do so, which is enough to change the results of the presidential election.

“Because the demographics of the United States indicate that the number of votes for each candidate will be approximately equal, there is a strong possibility that such fluctuations could force the court to decide the issue of freedom of elections,” Lessig warned.

On the subject: Unexpectedly: impeachment can help Trump win the 2020 presidential election of the year

In accordance with the Constitution, each state appoints electors to vote, distributed by popular vote. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia require electors to vote for their party's candidate.

The Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the state has the power to impose the first fines in history for the so-called wrong electors.

“An elector is governed by state law, and a First Amendment right is not violated when a state imposes a fine for an elector’s violation of the law,” the court ruled.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals set a different precedent in the case. “States may not prevent electors from exercising their discretion in voting for president and vice president,” the court ruled.

The split between the two courts—and the real prospect that electors could decide who wins the election—likely spurred the justices to act.

Even a Colorado voter, whose vote for Kasich was upheld, agreed that the Supreme Court should intervene. Only Washington State urged judges not to intervene.

To give electors such independence, the state's Solicitor General Noah Purcell wrote to the justices: "This would mean that only 538 Americans - members of the Electoral College - have the right to vote and can decide who should be President of the United States."

Read also on ForumDaily:

Recipes for extending power: how presidents changed the Constitution in the countries of the former USSR

Super women and console wars: what awaits us in 2020

Faces of 2019: Zelensky, Trump and Putin hit the provocative cover of The Week

Trump became the third president in US history to be impeached: what's next

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.