Appeals Court: presidential electors have a constitutional right to be faithless

[Xeuma]

This ruling brings the electoral college back to its constitutional roots.  The EC was expected to be a deliberative body that voted for the best person free of the "emotions" of the campaign.
Still it will continue to be incredibly rare for an elector to vote against the state result.

The College cannot be a deliberative body, as the electors of each state meet in the capital of their state. That is a constitutional requirement. There is no communication between the electors of two different states.

[Xeuma]

This ruling brings the electoral college back to its constitutional roots.  The EC was expected to be a deliberative body that voted for the best person free of the "emotions" of the campaign.
Still it will continue to be incredibly rare for an elector to vote against the state result.

The College cannot be a deliberative body, as the electors of each state meet in the capital of their state. That is a constitutional requirement. There is no communication between the electors of two different states.

In the 1700s that requirement prevented them from communicating. But in the 2000s with Skype, WhatsApp etc. they can obviously talk to the electors of other states in the weeks prior to the electors voting if they so wish.

Skype is against the eternal will of the Founders.