Judge Rules ‘Faithless Electors’ Are Replaceable After All
The group of electors who are supposed to vote for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton experienced the first major legal setback to their efforts Wednesday, according to The Washington Times.
The so-called “Hamilton electors” are former supporters of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and the group hopes to undermine the public’s trust in the Electoral College system by proving that electors are able to vote any way they choose, and that there is no legal remedy for the problem.
The reality is much different. The head electors of the movement filed a motion to gain the ability to vote for any other candidate other than Clinton, a motion that was denied by the Colorado court system Monday. Denver, Col. District Court Judge Elizabeth Starrs supports state protocols for removing electors if they vote for someone other than who they are required to elect Dec. 19, according to a decision Wednesday.
“If you take an oath of office and then immediately violate it, that should have consequences,” Williams told Denverite.
“Make no mistake, this is not some noble effort to fight some unjust or unconstitutional law; rather, this is an arrogant attempt by two faithless electors to elevate their personal desires over the entire will of the people of Colorado,” Williams said last week in a statement. “And in doing so, they seek to violate Colorado law and their own pledges.”
The group has growing support among Democratic electors, as well as the support of Texas Republican elector Chris Suprun. Harvard law professor Larry Lessig claims that as many as 20 Republican electors expressed interest in changing the way they vote Dec. 19, although he could provide no evidence to support the claim.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.