The legislature needs the governor in order to pass state laws, even election laws (see Smiley v Holm), but it absolutely has the Article II power to just select electors *without the governor*. What is controversial, in historical practice, about that?https://twitter.com/ckieser13/status/1423319194939101186 …
-
-
Cortez: I've burned the ships. Now there's no going back. Me: Pardon, sir. But there are a whole bunch of trees right over there. We could just rebuild the ships here. Right? Cortez: put that man on point.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You’ve provided an example from 1792 while asking what would be controversial about it (which is a different question than whether it is constitutional). Do you think there are other routine practices from 1792 that people might consider controversial today? Good one Dan!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So what you're saying is we *could* get rid of democratically elected US presidents, but not necessarily that we should.
-
In theory, we could still have them indirectly elected by state legislatures. Not should, but could.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.