[EL] Breadth of 'federal jurisdiction' over POTUS election

[Thomas J. Cares]

You know, California's electorate does effectively function as a third
house of the legislature. Voters can coalesce to introduce legislation
through the initiative process and then vote to pass it. The legislature
can't even amend the constitution without voter approval.

So let me ask, why can't the initiative that does this, also just type out
that California's registered voters are considered to make up a third house
of the state legislature - or really the only house that matters, as it can
referendum things passed by the other two, and amend the constitution
without the other 2, yet the other two can't amend the constitution without
it. It is the substantive legislature, and if we word it as such in our
constitution, it should hold up. Do you really think these semantics are
judiciously insurmountable?

"Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may
direct, a number of electors, "
In good faith, could someone believe those words pass explicit judgment on
voter initiatives which did not exist at the time they were written?

Then 'directed manner' - I'm completely lost as to why this does not
qualify as a 'directed manner'.

*I am interested to hear more views on the legal obstacles to doing this
though.*

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Mark Scarberry <
mark.scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:

> Two quick comments; then I need to sign off to write exams.
>
> It seems unlikely that a state constitutional provision can limit a
> legislature's choice of the manner by which electors are chosen.
>
> Use of national popular vote is not a manner by which a "state" chooses
> its electors, as required by Art. II.
>
> Mark
>
> Mark S. Scarberry
> Professor of Law
> Pepperdine University
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:11 AM -0800, "Thomas J. Cares" <Tom at tomcares.com>
> wrote:
>
> Can anyone comment on the legal issues Paul Jacob raises in the attached
>> brief dialogue? (Paul is a fairly influential activist in this arena. I
>> believe he was a main leader for the initiative for California to place
>> term limits on its congressional delegation, which courts struck down).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161205/b4f18d42/attachment.html>