LA Times By DAVID G. SAVAGE AUG. 28, 2019
Heading into what looks to be a hard-fought presidential election, the Supreme Court will likely be asked to resolve a lingering but fundamental question about the creaky, little-understood electoral college system adopted in 1787.
At issue is whether states can require their appointed electors to cast ballots for the candidate favored by most of the state’s voters on election day, or if electors may instead choose whomever they wish when convening a few weeks later. Rebellions by state electors have been a rarity in history, but a recent court ruling gave electors greater freedom to vote their conscience, and that could tip the outcome in a close election.
Article II of the Constitution created the electoral college to elect the president, rather than relying on a direct vote of the people. It says that states “shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors†that reflects the population of the state. Those electors in turn would vote for the president and vice president.
Since the early 1800s, this system has operated as “largely a formality,†the Washington state Supreme Court said in May. The electors, by pledge and often by law, cast their votes based on how their states vote. The candidate who wins the most votes in the state wins all the electoral votes, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska, where electoral votes can sometimes be split among candidates.
But last week, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upset the conventional understanding by ruling the electors have a “constitutional right†to vote as they wish for president, even if state law requires them to abide by the people’s choice.
The appeals court ruled for Micheal Baca, a Democratic elector in Colorado, who in 2016 cast his ballot for Ohio Gov. John Kasich, even though Hillary Clinton won the majority of Colorado’s votes. He was among several so-called faithless electors who in 2016 voted against the choice of their state’s voters.
More:
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-08-27/supreme-court-could-decide-whether-voters-or-electors-choose-the-president
