There is much commentary from experts who believe that if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that presidential electors are free to vote for any qualified candidate in December, that there will be an increase in electors who “disobey.”  This concern is not well founded.

In many states, the major parties in recent years have been very relaxed and casual about whom they choose to be presidential elector candidates.  But if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of elector freedom, that will change.  Major parties in the future will probably choose presidential elector candidates who are individuals with a long record of service to their political party.  The U.S. Constitution permits state legislators to be presidential electors.  Major parties would be free to choose their elector candidates from the ranks of veteran state legislators from their own party.  Experienced state legislators are known and understood by major party leaders.  Experienced state legislators who have a record would be “safe” choices for the major parties.

So, paradoxically, if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of elector freedom, the consequences are likely to be fewer “disloyal” electors in the future, rather than more.

On Saturday, May 9, the Minnesota legislature passed HF 3429.  It allows candidate petitions for the general election this year to be collected electronically.

It also gives the qualified parties more time to certify the names of their presidential and vice-presidential nominees, and their presidential elector candidates.  But it does not extend the deadline for unqualified parties and independent candidates.  The bill moves the deadline for the qualified parties from August 11 to August 28.  But the petition deadline for the presidential nominees of unqualified parties, and independent presidential candidates, remains August 18.

Reason Magazine has this detailed story about the Libertarian Party’s May 9 decisions about the 2020 presidential convention plans.