[EL] Rumors on replacing Trump (redux)

Sun Oct 9 04:41:36 PDT 2016

no problem.  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 10/8/2016 11:59:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
jswan at thehill.com writes:

David,  Rick, Sandy, Derek, Jim -- Would you mind if I quoted your  
contributions to this thread for a story?

On Saturday, 8 October 2016,  Derek Muller <derek.muller at gmail.com> wrote:

I'm not so sure. I think it may be easier than one may anticipate. For  
instance, in 2000, Missouri Senate voters learned quite quickly that a vote  
for the deceased "Mel Carnahan" meant a vote for his widow. The letters "Mel  
Carnahan" were simply hieroglyphics on the ballot.

In the (even more  unlikely) event Trump is replaced prior to the third 
presidential debate and  the Commission (subject to adequate polling to meet 
its objective standards,  etc.) could invite this Republican alternative to 
the  debate.

But unless and until some combination of Don Jr.,  Ivanka, Chris Christie, 
and Rudy Giuliani persuade him to drop out, the  chances of this scenario 
happening are effectively nil....

Derek T.  Muller
Associate  Professor of Law
Pepperdine  University School of Law
SSRN: _http://papers.ssrn.com/http://papers_ 
(http://papers.ssrn.com/author=464341) 
Twitter: _http://twitter.com/http://twitt_ 
(http://twitter.com/derektmuller) 

On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Pildes, Rick <pildesr at mercury.law.nyu.edu> 
wrote:

The  problem I see is that voters have to understand themselves to be 
voting  for some Republican alternative to Trump.  That would  be hard  to 
communicate effectively to enough potential voters without the name of  that 
alternative on the ballot.   

Richard  H. Pildes 
Sudler  Family Professor of Constitutional Law 
NYU  School of Law

From: Levinson,  Sanford V [mailto:SLevinson at law.utexas.eSL] 
Sent:  Saturday, October 08, 2016 10:17 AM
To: Schultz, David  A.
Cc: Pildes, Rick; JBoppjr at aol.com; lawcourt-l at legal.umass.edu; 
law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [Lawcourt-l]  [EL] Rumors on replacing Trump  (redux)

Forget all these technicalities. Why isn't the easiest  thing for a number 
of Republican electors to announce that they will cast  their votes for a 
untainted Republican. The best choice would clearly be  John Kasich, who has 
conducted himself as a man of honor and is a  plausible president. In any 
event, if Hillary doesn't get a majority of  electoral votes, a few Republican 
votes for Kasich (or Romney) sends it to  the House, which must choose among 
the three top electoral vote getters.  This allows the RNC to renounce 
Trump without requiring new ballots or  risking court fights, since I'm assuming 
that some states don't bind  electors. For the record, of course, I would 
like to see Clinton win in a  landslide, but I do wonder why the "House 
option" isn't being  discussed. 

Sandy

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 8, 2016, at 9:16  AM, Schultz, David A. <dschultz at hamline.edu> wrote:

Assume for the sake of argument that Jim Bopp and I  are correct that rule 
9 does not allow for the RNC to remove Trump from  the ticket.  What if 
nonetheless the RNC uses rule 9 to do so and  Trump  goes to court to fight it.  
Would the courts rule this  an internal party matter and therefore decline 
jurisdiction or rule in  favor of the party, or would they be willing to 
take the case and  potentially argue that Trump was wrongly removed by the 
ticket?  I  tend to think the courts would see it as an internal party matter 
and  not want to intervene in a political dispute or fight about who is the  
legitimate party nominee (and therefore cause more voter or ballot  
confusion).  Or  do some think the courts would say that  removing Trump at this late 
date would not be allowed by rule 9 and to  do so would cause more voter 
and ballot confusion.  

Thoughts?

On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Pildes, Rick <pildesr at mercury.law.nyu.edu>  
wrote: 

My  recollection is that the DNC rules do contain language that more 
clearly  permit the DNC to remove a candidate from the ballot than Rule 9 of the  
RNC, just for comparison.   

Richard  H. Pildes 
Sudler  Family Professor of Constitutional Law 
NYU  School of Law

From: law-election-bounces at departmenlaw-election-bo  
[mailto:law-election-bounces at dlaw-election-bounces@d]  On Behalf Of JBoppjr at aol.com
Sent: Saturday, October 08,  2016 7:25 AM
To: dschultz at hamline.edu; law-election at uci.edu; lawcourt-l at legal.umass.edu
Subject: Re: [EL]  Rumors on replacing Trump (redux)

I  agree with David that Rule 9 clearly does not authorize the RNC to  
remove Trump.  It only authorizes the RNC to fill a vacancy if it  occurs, ie 
for instance, if he steps down. The applicable part  is:

The  Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to 
fill  any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination,  
or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President . .  .

This  sentence only empowers the RNC to fill vacancies, not create them.   
The phrase that some are pointing to is "vacancies which may occur by  
reason of death, declination, or otherwise". "Otherwise" here  refers to how 
vacancies may occur, ie "by reason of death,  declination, or otherwise". For 
instance, a vacancy could  occur by disqualification of the candidate by 
election officials or a  court, because the candidate does not meet the legal 
qualifications to  be a candidate. There may be other reasons that a vacancy 
could  occur.

The  power to create a vacancy is a separate and independent power from the 
 power to fill vacancies and that power would have to  be conferred on the 
RNC by a specific rule, which does not  exist.

Jim  Bopp

In  a message dated 10/7/2016 10:04:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
dschultz at hamline.edu  writes:

In  light of Trump’s recent comments about women and questions about  
whether he can be replaced, consider first the rule 9 THE REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL 
COMMITTEE which is posted  below.

The  simple answer is no simple answer regarding what happens if Trump were 
 to be replaced on the ticket. The RNC executive committee has the  
authority to replace Trump if he steps down or is otherwise  incapacitated. A coup 
does not seem possible and it does not appear  that he can simply be 
replaced by the will of the RNC.    But assume Trump is replaced. The second issue 
is what to do  with the ballots. In some states the law would allow for a  
substitution while in others the law is more complicated and we might  a 
reprise of the Minnesota Wellstone death 11 days before the election  (of which 
I know way too much about). We also have, as with Wellstone,  the issue of 
already cast ballots and rights under state and federal  law that may force a 
right to recast ballots. There are a lot of  complicated practical as well 
as federal and state statutory and  constitutional issues at play here and 
there is no one simply answer  that applies to all 50 states.

RULE  NO. 9

Filling  Vacancies in Nominations

(a)  The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered  
to fill any and allvacancies which may occur by reason of death,  
declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of  the United 
States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of  the United States, as 
nominated by the national convention, or the  Republican National Committee 
may reconvene the national convention  for the purpose of filling any such  
vacancies.

--   

David  Schultz, Professor
Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education  (JPAE)
Hamline University
Department of Political  Science
1536  Hewitt Ave 

MS  B 1805
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
_651.523.2858_ (tel:651.523.2858)  (voice)
_651.523.3170_ (tel:651.523.3170)  (fax)
_http://davidschultz.efoliomn.chtt_ (http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/) 
_http://works.bepress.com/davidhttp://wo_ 
(http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/) 
_http://schultzstake.blogspot.chtt_ (http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/) 
Twitter:   @ProfDSchultz
My latest book:  Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter

_https://rowman.com/ISBN/978073https://rowman.com/ISBN/978https://rowman.com
/ISBN/97_ 
(https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780739195246/Presidential-Swing-States-Why-Only-Ten-Matter) 
FacultyRow  SuperProfessor, 2012, 2013,  2014

_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.Law-ele
_http://department-lists.uci.ed.ed<WBR>u/mailman/listinfo/law._ 
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election) 

--  

David Schultz, Professor
Editor, Journal of Public  Affairs Education (JPAE)
Hamline University
Department of  Political Science
1536 Hewitt Ave 

MS B 1805
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
_651.523.2858_ (tel:651.523.2858)  (voice)
_651.523.3170_ (tel:651.523.3170)  (fax)
_http://davidschultz.efoliomn.chtt_ (http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/) 
_http://works.bepress.com/davidhttp://wo_ 
(http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/) 
_http://schultzstake.blogspot.chtt_ (http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/) 
Twitter:   @ProfDSchultz
My latest book:  Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter

_https://rowman.com/ISBN/978073https://rowman.com/ISBN/978https://rowman.com
/ISBN/97_ 
(https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780739195246/Presidential-Swing-States-Why-Only-Ten-Matter) 
FacultyRow  SuperProfessor, 2012, 2013,  2014

_______________________________________________
Lawcourt-l  mailing list
Lawcourt-l at legal.umass.edu
_https://list.umass.edu/mailmanhttps://list.umass.e_ 
(https://list.umass.edu/mailman/listinfo/lawcourt-l) 

_______________________________________________
Law-election  mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.Law-ele
_http://department-lists.uci.edhttp://department-lists.uci.edh_ 
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election) 

--  

Jonathan Swan
National Political Reporter
The Hill
202-349-8124 office
202-390-7353 cell

_______________________________________________
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/20161009/c282eddf/attachment.html>