Anonymous ID: 61a2b7 March 18, 2019, 5:23 p.m. No.5762069   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2171 >>2437

lawfag here

attached are 3 academic studoes of the new compact to use popular vote and by pass the electoral college -for those anons interested - it is a political stunt and distraction

In short this effort will be invalidated by SCOTUS based on a number of issues this cheif of which is:

The principal constitutional impediment to NPVIC probably is the so-called “Compact Clause” in Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, which provides that “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress … enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State.” Although the US Supreme Court has concluded that the Compact Clause does not require Congress to consent to compacts that affect only the internal affairs of the compacting states, it has indicated in US Steel Corporation v. Multistate Tax Commission that the Compact Clause requires Congress to consent to an agreement that “would enhance the political power of the member States in a way that encroaches upon the supremacy of the United States,” or “impairs the sovereign rights of non-member states.”

 

https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2686&context=lawreview

 

http://harvardjol.com/2018/10/26/combination-among-the-states-npvic-unconstitutional/

 

https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2012/02/william-ross-vote-compact/

Anonymous ID: 61a2b7 March 18, 2019, 5:35 p.m. No.5762361   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>5762063

>OUR MASSIVE MOVEMENT

so if you are trying to peel off Q supporters and claim its a mass movement then how big is the Q movement - guess its bigger than massive

ginourmous? kek

what an asshole you are

Anonymous ID: 61a2b7 March 18, 2019, 5:38 p.m. No.5762437   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2524

>>5762171

>>5762069

 

well in fact states ARE allowed to tell electors who to vote for - that is the system now

most states have a law that requires electors to follow the popular vote in their state

oithers divide the electoral votes proportionately and both systems are legal

that said there is NO law on the books which can prevent an elector from NOT following that law - they may incur a penalty in the state but the vote stands

this is known as the "unfaithful elector" and has occurred from time to time but rare

never effected an outcome

this oddity reflect the traditional american premium and faith we all share in the integriity of the system

which alas has eroded but not to the extent the faithless electors have caused a problem