posted on Jul, 9 2020 @ 11:46 AM
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DanDanDat
Sounds like you are trying to make the rullling fit an agreement it was not intended for. You even acknowledge this by stating that the court will
have to further rule on the compact specifically before it where to take affect.
Yes this ruling plays in the same areas that the compact does since they both deal with election law; but its hardly a win for the compact. If
anything you might be able to say it doesn't sink the compact; but this was a ruling about "faithless electors" as a result of what happened in 2016
and not a predecessor to the NVPIC.
I wouldn't assume how the court will rule on the NVPIC based on this ruling. The majority opinion sounds like the court is trying to protect the
individual state voters
, not necessarily the state.
When NVPIC does come before the court it will not gain the same level of support as this ruling.
Personally I don't think the NVPIC will ever reach the court. If it ever where to come into play the only time where it would seriously be challenged
is when a states popular vote runs contrary to the national popular vote; under those circumstances the states government will be under popular
pressure to remove itself from the compact. No state government will defy the will of its own people to benefit one presidential candidate. Thats the
achilles heel of the NVPIC; it requires a states constituency to support a vote outside of its own interests.
edit on 9-7-2020 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)