Faithless elector

Faithless elector. A faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not vote for the presidential candidate or vice presidential candidate they were pledged to support, often in favor of another candidate, such as John Kasich or Bernie Sanders. This phenomenon has been observed in various United States presidential elections, including the 2016 United States presidential election and the 2000 United States presidential election, which involved candidates like Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and George W. Bush. The concept of faithless electors has been discussed by scholars like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, who were instrumental in shaping the United States Constitution and the Electoral College system.

Definition and History

The concept of faithless electors dates back to the early days of the United States, when the Electoral College was established by the Founding Fathers, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams. The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution have played a significant role in shaping the electoral process, which involves electors from states like California, New York, and Texas. Faithless electors have been discussed in the context of various United States presidential elections, including the 1824 United States presidential election, which involved candidates like John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson, and the 1872 United States presidential election, which involved candidates like Ulysses S. Grant and Horace Greeley. Scholars like Lawrence Lessig and Mark Levin have written about the implications of faithless electors on the electoral process, which is also influenced by the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact and the Electoral College Reform movement.

Faithless Elector Laws

Faithless elector laws vary from state to state, with some states like Michigan and Pennsylvania having laws that require electors to vote for the candidate who won the most votes in their state, while others like Colorado and Washington have more lenient laws. The Uniform Faithful Presidential Electors Act has been proposed as a model law to regulate the behavior of electors, but it has not been widely adopted. The National Association of Secretaries of State and the National Association of State Legislatures have discussed the issue of faithless electors and the need for clearer laws and regulations, which would involve coordination with officials like the Secretary of State of California and the Governor of New York. The American Bar Association and the Federal Election Commission have also weighed in on the issue, which has implications for the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee.

Notable Instances

There have been several notable instances of faithless electors in United States history, including the 1836 United States presidential election, in which Richard Mentor Johnson and Martin Van Buren were involved, and the 1948 United States presidential election, in which Harry S. Truman and Thomas E. Dewey were the main candidates. In the 2000 United States presidential election, an elector from Washington, D.C. abstained from voting in protest of the District of Columbia's lack of United States congressional representation, which is also an issue in Puerto Rico and other territories. In the 2016 United States presidential election, seven electors voted against their pledged candidates, including Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, with some voting for alternative candidates like John Kasich and Colin Powell. The 2016 United States presidential election in Texas and the 2016 United States presidential election in Washington were notable for their faithless electors, who were influenced by the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

Consequences and Controversies

The consequences of faithless electors can be significant, potentially altering the outcome of a United States presidential election and leading to controversy and United States congressional investigations, involving committees like the United States House Committee on the Judiciary and the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The issue has been discussed by scholars like Alan Dershowitz and Laurence Tribe, who have written about the implications of faithless electors on the United States Constitution and the Electoral College system, which is also influenced by the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. The National Archives and Records Administration and the Library of Congress have resources on the history of faithless electors and their impact on the electoral process, which is also studied by the Brookings Institution and the Cato Institute. The American Civil Liberties Union and the Heritage Foundation have also weighed in on the issue, which has implications for the Supreme Court of the United States and the United States Court of Appeals.

Supreme Court Rulings

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled on the issue of faithless electors in cases like McPherson v. Blacker and Ray v. Blair, which involved the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In the case of Chiafalo v. Washington, the Court ruled that states can require electors to vote for the candidate who won the most votes in their state, which has implications for the 2020 United States presidential election and the 2024 United States presidential election. The ruling was influenced by the Federalist Society and the American Constitution Society, which have discussed the issue of faithless electors and the Electoral College system, which is also influenced by the National Constitution Center and the Constitution Project. Scholars like Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch have written about the implications of the ruling on the electoral process, which is also studied by the Harvard Law Review and the Yale Law Journal.

Category:United States presidential elections