A Concept Of A Theory Of An Evil Plan

A theory on Trump's evil plan.🧵

If enough states refuse to certify the results of the election and submit a slate of electors—with the Supreme Court’s blessing—the math is not actually hard for Trump.https://t.co/DPTbhCFY6e

— Khashoggi’s Ghost 🇺🇦🌻 (@UROCKlive1) October 30, 2024

But I wouldn’t be so sure they’ll do so again, especially because this time the Trump people will not necessarily be asking the court to overturn the results of a state’s election. They’ll just be asking them to delay certification of those results, until some later date. In addition to ruling for the Trumpers outright, the court could simply delay hearing the case for as long as the delay is helpful for Trump. The Supreme Court can put its thumb on the scale for Trump simply by pretending to “stay out of it” and allowing the “process” to play itself out. 

If enough states refuse to certify the results of the election and submit a slate of electors—with the Supreme Court’s blessing—the math is not actually hard for Trump. Let’s say Vice President Kamala Harris wins the bare majority of Electoral College votes necessary, 270, but the Republican legislature in Wisconsin refuses to submit the state’s 10 electors by the deadline. In this scenario, the new total number of electors becomes 528, not 538—and Trump needs only 264 electoral votes to “win.” If you take Wisconsin and Nevada’s six electors out of the mix, Trump needs only 262 electoral votes to “win.” He’ll likely achieve those numbers without having to win one of the “blue wall” states.

Well, sure, that could happen. If the rule if law is abandoned by the courts and the red tide of anarchy is loosed upon the land. But short of that, the Electoral Count Reform Act (which Mystal cites but doesn’t seem to have read) says the states “shall” certify their electoral results according to state law enacted before Election Day. If they don’t, a court authorized certification can be used to appoint electors.

In other words, for “if enough states” substitute “if any state,” and insert “the certification happens anyway,” you have the real state of the law.

So, how do a number of states conspire to withhold certification of their votes until after the College meets? Magical thinking? Complete abandonment of the rule of law by all concerned?

Speaking of which:

And this is where Speaker Johnson becomes critical to the whole “secret” plan. In 2020, Nancy Pelosi was speaker of the House. If states had tried to get cute and not submit their electors by the December 11 deadline, Pelosi would just have extended the deadline. But Speaker Johnson surely won’t. If electors are not submitted by December 11, he’ll likely declare the process “over” and say that the electors appointed by that date are the only ones allowed to vote for president.

She could have? He could? Based on what provision of law, pray tell? There’s nothing in the ECRA that allows for this. 

Meeting and vote of electors The electors of President and Vice President of each State shall meet and give their votes on the first Tuesday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment at such place in each State in accordance with the laws of the State enacted prior to election day.

3 USC sec. 7.  

And while I have you here, sec. 13 is pertinent, too:

When, after the meeting of the electors shall have been held, no certificates of votes from any State shall have been received at the seat of government on the fourth Wednesday in December, the President of the Senate or, if the President of the Senate be absent from the seat of government, the Archivist of the United States shall send a special messenger to the district judge in whose custody one certificate of votes from that State has been lodged, and such judge shall forthwith transmit that certificate by the hand of such messenger to the seat of government.

Really not a lot of room there either for the Speaker to throw a spanner in the works, or for a state to withhold their electors (who are chosen on Election Day (3 USC sec. 1). Everything after that is just ministerial acts by the states. If they don’t do it, the district court will. Somebody with standing could force the issue and bring it to court. Plenty of interested parties would be happy to.

We’ve got enough problems without inventing new nightmares to worry needlessly about. Well, I guess it sells magazines. Isn’t that the excuse for keeping Trump in the headlines?