Read on Twitter
The following 8 paragraphs of legal background in the Texas SCOTUS election case are a fascinating historical context worth sharing in a mini thread:
“The individual citizen has no federal
constitutional right to vote for electors for the
President of the United States unless and until the
state legislature chooses a statewide election as the
means to implement its power to appoint members of
the electoral college.”
constitutional right to vote for electors for the
President of the United States unless and until the
state legislature chooses a statewide election as the
means to implement its power to appoint members of
the electoral college.”
State legislatures have plenary power to
set the process for appointing presidential electors:
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the
Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.”
U.S. CONST. art. II, §1, cl. 2
set the process for appointing presidential electors:
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the
Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.”
U.S. CONST. art. II, §1, cl. 2
At the time of the Founding, most States
did not appoint electors through popular statewide
elections. In the first presidential election, six of the
ten States that appointed electors did so by direct
legislative appointment. McPherson v. Blacker, 146
U.S. 1, 29-30 (1892).
did not appoint electors through popular statewide
elections. In the first presidential election, six of the
ten States that appointed electors did so by direct
legislative appointment. McPherson v. Blacker, 146
U.S. 1, 29-30 (1892).
In the third presidential election, nine of
sixteen States that appointed electors did so by direct
legislative appointment. This practice
persisted in lesser degrees through the Election of
1860.
sixteen States that appointed electors did so by direct
legislative appointment. This practice
persisted in lesser degrees through the Election of
1860.
Given the State legislatures’
constitutional primacy in selecting presidential
electors, the ability to set rules governing the casting
of ballots and counting of votes cannot be usurped by
other branches of state government.
constitutional primacy in selecting presidential
electors, the ability to set rules governing the casting
of ballots and counting of votes cannot be usurped by
other branches of state government.
The Framers of the Constitution decided
to select the President through the Electoral College
“to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult
and disorder” and to place “every practicable obstacle
[to] cabal, intrigue, and corruption,” including ...“foreign
powers” ...
to select the President through the Electoral College
“to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult
and disorder” and to place “every practicable obstacle
[to] cabal, intrigue, and corruption,” including ...“foreign
powers” ...
... that might try to insinuate themselves into
our elections. THE FEDERALIST NO. 68
our elections. THE FEDERALIST NO. 68
Above are direct quotes from the lawsuit.
Plaintiff is establishing this foundation because one of the remedies sought would remand the selection of electors, in case they are already certified, back to state legislatures.
Plaintiff is establishing this foundation because one of the remedies sought would remand the selection of electors, in case they are already certified, back to state legislatures.
