[EL] it appears there are at least 2 factual errors in US Supreme Court electors decision

[Richard Winger]

For those interested in the miniscule details of the presidential electors decision from the US Supreme Court, I think there are two factual errors in Justice Kagan's decision.  I hope to get feedback.
Page five, footnote two, says 15 states have sanctions against electors who "disobey".  That includes Arizona, with a cite to Ariz Rev Stat Ann 16-212.  But all 16-212 says is "Election of presidential electors.  On the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 1956, and quadrennially thereafter, there shall be elected a number of presidential electors equal to the number of US Senators and representatives in Congress from this state."
That is the entire substance of 16-212.  There is no other law in Arizona that says there are sanctions for electors who disobey.  It may be that Kagan just copied the list of states and their relevant codes from the amicus filed by several dozen states.  That amicus also cites to 16-212.
The other factual error is on page 17:  "But because faithless votes have never come close to affecting an outcome..." In 1836, the Virginia Democratic electors refused to vote for the party's nominee for vice-president, Richard Johnson.  As a result no one got a majority for vice-president, and the US Senate had to choose the vice-president, the only time that ever happened.  The Senate chosen Johnson.

Richard Winger 415-922-9779 PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20200713/45f23acb/attachment.html>