Plan to split Colorado's EVs makes ballot

[muon2]

Wouldn't a law like this have to be passed prior to the first election its applied to?  I mean, if this is on the ballot in CO this year, and it passes, I can see that it applies to 2008....but not 2004.

There are cases in some staes (I know for sure in IL) that have resolved the issue of concurrent referendum and election. In IL the ruling is that the referendum takes precedence because its results are certified before the elected candidate would be sworn into the office. Since the candidate does not lose an office already held, there is no reason to have that person take an office that is abolished by the voters.

[muon2]

It is also in CLEAR violation of USC 3 - so this thing gets nuked by the courts anyway, but it will not pass anyway IMHO.

What would be in violation of USC 3?

There are three interlocking sections of 3 USC that apply here, 3 USC Sec. 5, 3 USC Sec. 6, and 3 USC Sec. 15.

3 USC Sec. 15 contains the rules for how Congress is supposed to decide whether electoral votes are valid or not.  The first hurdle that would need to passed would be 3 USC Sec. 6 which specifies how a State is supposed to certify the electors of the State and send said certification to Congress.  If Colorado only certifies one slate of electors  then Congress is left with no real option, but to accept that slate and the votes cast by that slate.  However, if court battles over the timing of when the referendum goes into effect should cause multiple slates to be certified then 3 USC Sec. 5 comes into play as it gives preference to a slate selected according to the provision of law "enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors".  The federal courts would then get to decide whether 3 USC Sec. 5 applies, which it probably would, in which case the slate selected by the previous law would apply.  But if for some reason the courts failed to so say, then it would become a political potato for Congress whose heat would depend upon whether the four electoral votes so affected would decide the election.

I would also worry about the interpretation of "the day fixed for the appointment of electors". Is that the election day, the day the results are certified (usually 1-2 weeks later), or the day the electors are sworn to their office?