A 2020 election query for you lawyers on the board

[JohnStOnge]

Ok. I've been looking at the "Legal Provisions Relevant to the Electoral College Process" page at https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/provisions.

Can you lawyers on the board explain to me how the actual language involved allows for what the Republicans are trying to do now?

My understanding is that the 12th Amendment is what governs the counting constitutionally. Linguistically, I don't see any discretion there. What I see is that Congress just counts the certified results sent by the States. The only way Congress becomes involved beyond that is if nobody gets a majority.

Also I am looking at Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended) Section 15 on counting the votes. I don't see any allowance for rejecting any of the certified results that have been submitted. There is a provision for objecting, but it says "no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified."

I won't quote section 6 but you can look at it. Theoretically I can see maybe trying to argue that electors weren't selected according to the laws of states but there have been a bunch of court cases trying to argue that results shouldn't be certified due to that and they failed.

I thought Republicans were supposed to believe in doing what the law actually says. What the hell is going on?

[CAA Flagship]

What the hell is going on?

Fraud

[AshevilleApp]

What the hell is going on?

Fraud

By the party of the sitting President. Sad.

[JohnStOnge]

What the hell is going on?

Fraud

In case you really believe that, I actually don't see anything in any of the provisions that says people in Congress can refuse to accept electoral votes because they think there was fraud. Again: There have been numerous court cases at this point to litigate questions about whether or not there was fraud and whether or not States violated their election laws so that votes should not count. Trump's side failed to establish any of that through those court cases. We have a system for deciding on whether or not the kinds of things they are saying are valid. It's called the Court System. It has been applied and the conclusion was that these are legal, valid electoral votes certified according to State processes.

So now we're going to have a bunch of people in Congress say "WE'RE going to say there was fraud anyway" and/or "WE'RE going to say States didn't follow their election laws anyway."

What kind of precedent are these people setting by doing this? Hopefully it will fail. But even if it does fail we will have had a very large number of Republicans in Congress say they think that Congress should have the authority to just overthrow a Presidential election if it has to votes to do so.

This country really, really needs to get rid of the Republican Party as a significant factor in the direction of our country. These people are a serious threat to Government by the People.

[SDHornet]

Well done flaggy. One word and an emoji gets 200+ words out of JSO. You win the internets for the day.

[Ibanez]

What the hell is going on?

Fraud

50 + lawsuits later and still no evidence...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SuperHornet]

What I'm seeing is allegations of fraud perpetrated by the Left being counteracted with potentially fraudulent lawsuits by the Right. Even if ANY of the allegations were true, it seems that the net effect on the election was negligent at best. In any event, two wrongs do not make a right. The Commies won. Let them have it for now and focus on fighting off Harris and/or Newsom in 2024....