SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Electoral College 2000 - Ahead of the Curve -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TraderGreg who wrote (3970)11/29/2000 9:23:53 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 6710
 
>>Would you not anticipate a court challenge to the FL legislature appointing electors?<<

First, let me make sure that you understand that, pursuant to the Great Compromise, the power to appoint Electors to the Electoral College is the sole prerogative of state legislatures, however they want to do it.

In fact, it is their Constitutional duty to do so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Second, let me make sure that you understand that, in the early years, after the Constitution was ratified, state legislatures appointed Electors directly, without our modern system of popular vote.

Remember that when the Constitution was adopted, not many people had the right to vote. You are, no doubt, aware, that blacks and women could not vote. You may not be aware that not all white men could vote - only landowners.

It was the election of 1824 (John Quincy Adams won the Electoral College vote despite the fact that Andrew Jackson won the popular vote)that led to enfranchising white men who did not own land, and electing Electors by popular vote, so-called Jacksonian democracy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK, so we have established, I hope, to your satisfaction, that for decades the state legislatures appointed Electors without considering the popular vote, and if you want to read more, there is plenty out there on the Internet. It's not a nutty idea, it's the way it used to be. More importantly, it's the way the Founding Fathers envisioned it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Third, let me make sure that you understand that, pursuant to the doctrines of Separation of Powers, and Federalism, there are some things that are what is called "non-justiciable." That means, oddly enough, believe it or not, that a court can't even take a look at some decisions by the executive branch and the legislative branch, and that the United States Supreme Court can't review some decisions at the state level. It's hard to believe, I know, but there are just some things that a court CAN'T decide, because it is not within what is called "their purview."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fast forward to 2000.

Who is empowered to review a decision by the Florida Legislature to appoint Electors to the Electoral College?

NOT the Florida Supreme Court. That much is certain.

I think the United States Supreme Court can, and if it comes to that, will, take a look at it, but I think they will defer to the Florida Legislature.

I think that the United States House of Representatives can, and if it comes to that, will, take a look at it, but I think they, too, will defer to the Florida Legislature.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The fact that the United States Supreme Court and the United States House of Representatives, like the Florida Legislature, is majority Republican, is part of the reason for my conclusions as to the likely outcome of these events.
Would it be better if the decision was made by neutral parties?

As you know, I don't think these exist.

Would it be better if we had not come to this?

Yes, but we have.