Probably Not My Last Word On The Matter

Experts hope this law could save America from Trump election chaoshttps://t.co/HYIkjFu2im

— Raw Story (@RawStory) October 21, 2024

From MSNBC:

Once Congress completes the electoral count on Jan. 6, the process is over and its results are final, except in the unlikely event that no candidate has won the necessary majority of 270 electoral votes. In this scenario, under the 12th Amendment, a “contingent election” would be held, with the House electing the president (under an unusual procedure where each state delegation casts one vote) and the Senate would choose the vice president. 

To the maximum degree consistent with the Constitution, ECRA sought to put electoral disputes into the courts rather than being decided by Congress. Any arguments over which candidate, and thus which party’s slate of electors, has won a state’s popular vote is to be decided in federal court prior to when the Electoral College meets in December. In all cases, state law as it stands on Election Day is decisive, and states may not change the rules after the fact. 

Congress, with the vice president presiding ceremonially but having no say in the matter, is empowered to address only a narrow set of questions about whether the otherwise valid electors have cast their votes in a permissible manner under the Constitution, such as for a candidate who is not a natural-born citizen or who is not at least 35 years old. But the role of Congress will not be to relitigate disputes over how each state conducted its election. 

Once this process is complete — state laws implementing a popular election for members of the Electoral College, courts deciding any disputes over the outcome of those elections, the duly appointed electors meeting and casting their votes, and Congress counting the electoral votes — the winner will be sworn in at noon on Jan. 20, a date and time set in stone by the 20th Amendment.

Most of the ECRA bans the stunts Trump tried to pull in 2020:

As with most other matters under ECRA, states must apply their election laws as they stood on Election Day, with no later alterations permitted, such as by the legislature convened in a special session. In each state, a possible emergency invocation of these extended voting procedures is assigned to a designated official, who may be the governor, secretary of state or a state elections board. This rule also forecloses the idea, advocated by some during the 2020 election, of state legislatures or other officials attempting to overturn the results of the state’s popular vote.

That’s one.

The next step in the process is the counting of votes and the ascertainment of a winner in each state. Here, ECRA provides a remedy intended to address problems not just from 2020 but also from the notorious 2000 election. Instead of the usual cumbersome procedure for federal litigation, where lawsuits must be filed first in a district court and then appealed to one of the circuit courts before finally reaching the Supreme Court, a special three-judge panel is provided, consisting of two circuit judges and one district judge. This court’s rulings are then directly appealable to the Supreme Court, ensuring a prompt resolution of both legitimate legal objections and possible rogue actions by state officials. If any state official refuses to comply, the courts are empowered to order another official to provide the necessary certifications.

And another.

An interesting wrinkle occurs here. The Supreme Court recently ruled that only Congress can enforce art. 3 of the 14th Amendment. Which means a majority of Congress could disqualify Trump on those grounds in January 6, 2025. Congress, after all:

… is empowered to address only a narrow set of questions about whether the otherwise valid electors have cast their votes in a permissible manner under the Constitution, such as for a candidate who is not a natural-born citizen or who is not at least 35 years old.

Or who is disqualified under the 14th amendment.

Don’t expect it to happen; but it would be allowed. Presidential immunity doesn’t extend to non-Presidents.

And there you have it. Please note Congress has authority under Article III to create courts and establish their jurisdiction, so establishing a three judge panel to decide vote count disputes with appeals directly to the Supreme Court is perfectly regular.

There’s a reason Trump and his cronies are suing to block voters from voting. It’s because the ECRA pretty much shuts off all avenues to suits over voting results, at least for the President. Which is the only result they care about, or ever allege could be fraudulent.

Funny, that.