The Federal court of justice undercuts progressive efforts to destroy the Electoral College, the rules of choice of your choice can be justified right

in the vicinityVideoOcasio-Cortez proposes that the election Committee is racist

“The Daily Briefing’ host says Dana Perino, it is a disservice to say that the Electoral College should be abolished, without realizing that it serves a purpose.

In a major blow to state-by-state progressive efforts to effectively replace the Electoral College with a nationwide referendum, a Federation ends-the court of appeal ruled on Tuesday that the presidential-voters have the absolute right to vote for the presidential candidate of your choice.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Colorado secretary of state against the Constitution in the year 2016, when he removed an elector and cancelled his vote, refused because of the elector, and gave his vote for the Democrats, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.

The rogue elector was to convince part of an unsuccessful scheme to unite enough of the members of the election Committee behind an alternative candidate, and refuse Donald Trump to the presidency.

The split decision by a three-judge panel of the Denver appeals court said only that “the state does not have the offsetting authority to remove an elector, and to cancel, his voice in response to the exercise of a Constitutional right.”

The court of appeal argued that, when electors show up on the Electoral College, the major Federal actors, independent of state control. “The States” to appoint to power, the voters will not have the power to remove or cancel your vote,” the court said.


Prominent Democrats, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-New York, proposed the Electoral College in the last few weeks, called it a racist “fraud,” and Democrats have always tried to erase his influence.


The so-called National Popular Vote interstate compact, which States the election of men to the winner of the national vote, adopted 16 areas of law, accounting for 196 electoral votes, including 15 States and the District of Columbia.

But the compact, of the terms and conditions will be effective only if legal accounting areas of at least 270 of the total 538 votes available, the sign up in the Electoral College.

Tuesday’s judgment could be fatal for a new Colorado law signed effective under the state on the compact, by preventing States and their voters to vote for the popular vote winner. Other States that have signed on to the compact, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Washington, Connecticut, New Jersey, Illinois, California and New York.

To Protect at the same time, Frank McNulty, a consultant to Colorado votes, what they want to inform the voters to overturn the law, that the judgment could also support the free voters, to decide, on their own, is the candidate with the most votes at the national level.

“It is a double-edge decision,” he said.


The Electoral College system is established in the Constitution. If the voters cast a ballot for President, you are actually selecting the members of the election Committee, called the voters, who have pledged to that presidential candidate. The electors then select the President.

Democrats, who currently have a stranglehold on the power in the population-dense States such as California and New York, have long as the Electoral College, protested. States get electoral votes corresponding to its number of congressional districts plus senators, which allows the less populous States have more influence than they would under a popular vote system.

“It is a double-edge decision.”

To Protect Frank McNulty, consultant, Colorado votes

The forthcoming census in 2020 is expected to result in some shifts in the Electoral College numbers up to 2024, including an increase in the electoral votes for traditional GOP strongholds like Texas.

Tuesday, the ruling applies only to Colorado and five other States in the 10th Circuit: Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming.

But it could influence future cases nationwide in the unlikely event that enough election Committee members had strayed from its member States a popular vote to influence the outcome of the presidential elections, constitutional scholars said.

The elector in the center of the housing, Michael Baca, was part of a group known as the “Hamilton electors” who is trying to convince voters who is pledged to Clinton or Donald Trump to unite behind a consensus, the refusal of candidates to trump the presidency.

After a flood of filings in state and Federal courts, the sentences, the choice of men on Dec. 19, 2016, and Baca by Clinton ‘ s deleted names on his ballot and wrote in John Kasich, the Republican Governor of Ohio, who also ran for President.

FILE – In this Dec. 19, 2016, file photo, Colorado elector of Michael Baca, second from left, talks with the legal counsel, after he was removed from the panel for voting for a different candidate than the one that won the popular vote, the Electoral College vote at the Capitol in Denver. Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams, front right, looks on. On Tuesday, Aug. 20, 2019, the 10. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Williams violated the Constitution when he removed Baca of the plate. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley, file)

Then-Secretary of state Wayne Williams refused to count the vote and removed Baca as an elector. He replaced it with another elector who voted for Clinton.

Colorado is the current secretary of state, Jena Griswold, defendant, the decision on Tuesday in Colorado, but did not immediately say whether they would appeal.

“This ruling takes power from Colorado voters and set a dangerous precedent,” she said. “Our nation stands on the principle of” one person, one vote.”

Baca’s lawyers said the U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the case because it conflicts with a decision from the Washington state Supreme Court. The court said in may, the voters might be the fines for not casting a ballot for the popular vote winner.


Constitutional scholars were skeptical, to say that a contradictory opinion of a state court system that has less impact on the Supreme court as from other Federal appellate court. No other Federal court of appeal accepted that ruled in a similar case.

The judgment of the court of justice in Denver, could be important if a future election Committee is divided into a handful of “faithless voters” change the outcome by casting a vote contrary to the vote of the people, – said Ned Foley, a professor at the Ohio State University law school.

Jan. 6, 2017: Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., keeps a written objection to the election Committee vote and a Senator is calling for the opposition, during a joint session of Congress the election ballot count, on Capitol Hill in Washington.

“This opinion would be taken very seriously,” he said. “It would, as a judicial precedent.”

Meanwhile, in parallel, Congress efforts to tear down the Electoral College, were unsuccessful. In January, Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., a couple of Constitution introduced to eliminate changes, the election Committee, said it was “outdated.”

“Americans expect and deserve the winner of the people to win the vote office,” Cohen said at the time. “For more than a century ago that we amended our Constitution to provide for the direct election of U.S. senators. It is long at the time, directly to our President and Vice-presidents choose.”

However, a constitutional amendment to eliminate the electoral Committee would have to approve two-thirds of the house and Senate the measure, together with three-quarters of the state legislatures. Alternatively, Congress could hold a national Convention, and States the ratification of conventions, but a two-thirds could host the majority would still be necessary.


Trump secured the victory in the election of 2016 by winning the electoral Committee, with 304 votes, to Clinton 232 despite Clinton winning by almost three million more votes than trump.

John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George W. Bush also won the White house without winning the popular vote. Those presidents, only Bush was re-elected to a second term.

Fox News’ Ronn Blitzer and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular