NPVIC - Is it constitutional?

[Senator-elect Spark]

Is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact legal? What happens when it goes into effect?

[Senator-elect Spark]

Would requiring proportional allocation of EVs require a constitutional amendment or just via statute by Congress?

[AGA]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

But besides this, the states can apportion their electors however they want…

[NewYorkExpress]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

[Skill and Chance]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

[NewYorkExpress]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

[SteveRogers]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

What part of the Constitution do you base that opinion on? You know that for a good chunk of history many states didn’t even hold popular votes for their electors, right?

[AGA]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

That's just not true.

[NewYorkExpress]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

What part of the Constitution do you base that opinion on? You know that for a good chunk of history many states didn’t even hold popular votes for their electors, right?

The Constitutional requirement for electors to meet in the state capitol. Congressional Districts don't have capitol cities.

[brucejoel99]

Yes, obviously. The Electors Clause very clearly permits the states to award their EVs "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct," & under the Virginia v. Tennessee precedent, Congress' approval of the compact wouldn't even be required because awarding EVs is a power that's expressly & exclusively granted solely to the states under the Constitution (but of course, that still won't stop Republicans with ulterior motives & incentive to block the NPVIC from arguing in bad-faith that Congress' approval is required anyway).

Also, NYE's takes are all laughably wrong, let alone absolutely insane, news at 11.

[SteveRogers]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

What part of the Constitution do you base that opinion on? You know that for a good chunk of history many states didn’t even hold popular votes for their electors, right?

The Constitutional requirement for electors to meet in the state capitol. Congressional Districts don't have capitol cities.

The electors for Maine and Nebraska do meet in their state capitals…

[Terfnerf]

Probably, but would it make more sense for states to just declare their electors to go to the national popular vote winner regardless of whether enough states join in?

[politicallefty]

I think the compact aspect of it is irrelevant. States have plenary power to choose the manner of appointing electors. You can look to McPherson v. Blacker (1892) and, more recently, 2020's Chiafalo v. Washington. In the latter, the Court ruled unanimously that states can penalize electors for voting contrary to how a state wishes and also that states can replace electors that do not vote according to the laws of the state. In McPherson, the Court ruled that there is no constitutional requirement for states to assign their electors to the winner of the popular vote in their respective states.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Probably, but would it make more sense for states to just declare their electors to go to the national popular vote winner regardless of whether enough states join in?

I think it would be an interesting thing to try, but none of the individual states want to make the leap until they have 270.

[ibagli]

I'm not saying it's a good argument, but I think someone could strain really hard and construct a one person-one vote argument against it, that if a state holds a popular election for the offices of presidential elector, it has to be based only on equal suffrage within the state (i.e. at-large in some manner, or through equally-populated districts), and that adding in the votes of people who are not residents or citizens of the state impermissibly dilutes the votes of the majority/plurality that voted for the state-level winner. So, in the same way that you can't have a system where 45% beats 55% because the 45% are in proximity to more "trees or acres," you couldn't have a system where 45% beats 55% because the 45% have more people who agree with them in other places. (The obvious retort would be that it doesn't violate 1P1V since all votes are equally "diluted.")

[(no subject)]

It’s only A game changer if Republican states adopt it which they won’t.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

It would need to be approved by Congress to be constitutional.

Even if it were, I don't think it it's constitutional. Then again, I'm also convinced the way Nebraska and Maine divide their electoral votes by Congressional District is also unconstitutional.

Why would EV-by-CD in states without VRA district obligations be unconstitutional?

I'm of the opinion that the Constitution specifically mandates that the electoral college be awarded winner-take-all in every state and Washington D.C.

Then you are historically ignorant.  Not only was the current Maine/Nebraska scheme used in many States in the first few Presidential elections, but some States even created separate EDs to select Electors. It wasn't until the advent of political parties that the winner-takes-the-whole-state method became the usual one.

[Greedo punched first]

SCOTUS would strike it down 5-4.

[brucejoel99]

SCOTUS would strike it down 5-4.