Washington State Supreme Court Rules 8-1 Against Presidential Elector Freedom

On May 23, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that presidential electors who do not vote for the presidential candidate who got the most popular votes in their state may be fined $1,000.  Guerra v Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings, 95347-3.  Here is the decision.

The majority rests its opinion mostly on the U.S. Supreme Court case, Ray v Blair.  But that case only settled that political parties may keep presidential elector candidates off their primary ballots if those candidates won’t sign a pledge to be “faithful.”  The case was from Alabama, and at the time Alabama presidential elector candidates were nominated in a party primary.  No state any longer lets presidential elector candidates run in primaries.

The dissent, by Justice Steven Gonzalez, says, “There is a meaningful difference between the power to appoint and the power to control.”  The majority decision does not grapple with his point.  The decision isn’t too surprising, given the tenor of the oral argument when the case was argued  earlier this year.

Still pending is the Colorado case, in the Tenth Circuit, where the oral argument seemed to indicate that two of the three judges believe that presidential electors have the freedom to vote for whom they please.  Baca v Griswold, 18-1173.  Thanks to Derek Muller for the link.  Here is his analysis of the opinion, from his blog, “Excess of Democracy.”


Comments

Washington State Supreme Court Rules 8-1 Against Presidential Elector Freedom — 5 Comments

  1. appointments = LIMITS on *discretion* [ie being arbitrary] ???

    — appointed cops, dog catchers, etc.


    One more op — reason to abolish the late DARK AGE EC scheme from hell —

    based on the 1787 scheme for getting Polish Kings.

    Uniform definition of Elector-Voter in ALL of USA.
    AppV exec/judic – pending Condorcet

  2. Also 14-2.

    — ie party hack 12th Amdt Electors – 14-2 votes for party hack slates of EC folks.

    ie *will* of voters being subverted by faithless EC party hacks.

  3. The problem occurs when the presidential candidates do not choose their associated electors.

    Washington, Colorado, Minnesota, Hawaii, and Texas all chose elector candidtes at state conventions hostile to the eventual party nominees. Even if an elector pledged to support the eventual nominee, in their mind, they may have been pledging to vote for Bernie Sanders or Ted Cruz.

    Washington should choose presidential electors by Top 2. Elector candidates could still indicate a presidential preference.

  4. ALL States should demand an Art V Convention to —

    make Democracy reforms [PR and AppV]

    OR

    divide the USA ASAP — into red COMMUNIST and blue FASCIST parts

    — with LOTS of folks moving to get away from the reds/blues.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.