In 1792, for example, state legislatures chose the electors in 9 of the 15 states. We have, for good reason, moved beyond that, but constitutionally there is no obstacle to going back.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Has any case ever said this? Just as a matter of current law, isn't Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission to the contrary?
-
Yes, McPherson v Blacker goes into detail on this point.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Why even have elections then?
-
We have elections because each legislature has chosen to do it that way. But they don’t have to (although I can’t picture any of them choosing to do away with elections).
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So you would say there's a difference between laws regulating the manner in which the election is conducted (where the election was already set to happen) and the straight up appointment of electors, right?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Here's a REAL CONSERVATIVE opinion, not the anti democracy party
@gop:https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1423280683284324352?s=19 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Smiley v. Holm defines what "Legislature" means, but not "Manner". But there's certainly no reason why a State Legislature couldn't define the manner as "we alone choose them".
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.