💥 BREAKING: SUPREME COURT SAYS STATES MAY PUNISH OR REMOVE "FAITHLESS" PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS
Justice Kagan writes for a unanimous court.
Justice Kagan writes for a unanimous court.
Here's the opinion supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf…
That's it for today.
Gist: this means no shenanigans will be possible between Election Day and the meeting of the electoral college in December. Electors are bound to the winning candidate in their state (or, in Maine and Nebraska, the region of their state).
Here's the closing of Justice Kagan's crisp majority opinion 
Justice Thomas writes separately (when does he not?) to explain that he would resolve the case purely on the basis of the 10th amendment (federalism & state's rights).
For more on these cases, see my May story economist.com/united-states/…
A year after writing a bitter dissent in the gerrymandering case, Justice Kagan gets to write an elections & democracy majority opinion that all of her colleagues sign on to.
