Supreme Court rules 'faithless electors' can't go rogue at Electoral College

Source: NBC News - View Original Article
Published: Jul 17, 2020
Category:
Bias Rating:

85% Conservative


Bias Score Calculation:

This article includes the following sentiments, providing an average bias score of 85% Conservative:

  • 3 positive sentiments for Electoral College


Policies:

Electoral College

Sentiments

  •   Conservative
  •   Neutral
91% "The 538 people who cast the actual votes for president in December as part of the Electoral College are not free agents and must vote as the laws of their states direct, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday."
90% "Harvard Law Professor Larry Lessig, who advocates Electoral College reform, told the court that nothing in the Constitution gives states any authority to restrict how an elector can vote, because they act in a federal role when meeting as the Electoral College."
84% "In Maine and Nebraska, presidential electors are guided by the votes of congressional districts."
83% "Those electors meet in December to cast their ballots, which are counted during a joint session of Congress in January."
69% "The Supreme Court ruled in 1952 that states do not violate the Constitution when they require electors to pledge that they will abide by the results of the popular vote."
67% "And in Washington state, where Clinton also won the popular vote, three of the state's 12 electors voted for Colin Powell, the former secretary of state."
63% "The court's opinion said presidential electors must act as their states require, which in most of the nation means voting for the candidate who won the popular vote in their states."
61% "WASHINGTON --"
53% "Voters instead choose a slate of electors appointed in their states by the political parties."
-51% "The November general election is not actually a direct vote for the presidential candidates."
-54% "Lessig said he hoped the controversy would encourage more states to adopt a system in which they would assign all of their electors to the candidate who wins the nationwide popular vote for president."
-66% "If the court had ruled the other way, then individual electors who decided to vote as they wished in a close race could potentially have the power decide who wins."
-68% "Four faithless electors from Colorado and Washington state who did not conform to the popular vote in the 2016 election sued, claiming that states can regulate only how electors are chosen, not what comes later."
-69% "It would take effect once the participating states represent at least 270 electoral votes, the minimum needed to be elected president."
-75% "More than a dozen states have signed an interstate agreement to make the change."


*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization

Extremely
Liberal

Very
Liberal

Moderate-left

Neutral

Moderate-right

Very
Conservative

Extremely
Conservative

100%

100%

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

91% : The 538 people who cast the actual votes for president in December as part of the Electoral College are not free agents and must vote as the laws of their states direct, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday.
90% : Harvard Law Professor Larry Lessig, who advocates Electoral College reform, told the court that nothing in the Constitution gives states any authority to restrict how an elector can vote, because they act in a federal role when meeting as the Electoral College.
84% : In Maine and Nebraska, presidential electors are guided by the votes of congressional districts.
83% : Those electors meet in December to cast their ballots, which are counted during a joint session of Congress in January.
69% : The Supreme Court ruled in 1952 that states do not violate the Constitution when they require electors to pledge that they will abide by the results of the popular vote.
67% : The unanimous decision in the "faithless elector" case was a defeat for advocates of changing the Electoral College, who hoped a win would force a shift in the method of electing presidents toward a nationwide popular vote.
67% : And in Washington state, where Clinton also won the popular vote, three of the state's 12 electors voted for Colin Powell, the former secretary of state.
63% : The court's opinion said presidential electors must act as their states require, which in most of the nation means voting for the candidate who won the popular vote in their states.
61% : WASHINGTON --
53% : Voters instead choose a slate of electors appointed in their states by the political parties.
49% : The November general election is not actually a direct vote for the presidential candidates.
46% : Instead of voting for Hillary Clinton, who won the popular vote in Colorado, Micheal Baca cast his vote for John Kasich, the former Republican governor of Ohio.
46% : But the justices had never before said whether it is constitutional to enforce those pledges.
46% : Lessig said he hoped the controversy would encourage more states to adopt a system in which they would assign all of their electors to the candidate who wins the nationwide popular vote for president.
34% : If the court had ruled the other way, then individual electors who decided to vote as they wished in a close race could potentially have the power decide who wins.
32% : But it was a win for state election officials who feared that empowering rogue electors would cause chaos.
32% : Four "faithless electors" from Colorado and Washington state who did not conform to the popular vote in the 2016 election sued, claiming that states can regulate only how electors are chosen, not what comes later.
31% : It would take effect once the participating states represent at least 270 electoral votes, the minimum needed to be elected president.
25% : More than a dozen states have signed an interstate agreement to make the change.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap