Explainer: Why Election Day could be just the start of a long battle
over the U.S. presidency
Send a link to a friend
[July 31, 2020]
By Joseph Ax
(Reuters) - President Donald Trump's
suggestion on Thursday the Nov. 3 presidential election be delayed due
to voter fraud was immediately rejected by lawmakers and dismissed by
legal experts, but it raises the specter of a disputed election that
could take weeks or even months to resolve.
Here are some of the messy scenarios at play – and how they might
unfold:
DELAYED RESULTS
Under the Constitution, only Congress has the power to change the date
of the election - and with Democrats in control of the U.S. House of
Representatives, there is essentially no chance of that happening.
But the widespread use of mail ballots thanks to the pandemic will
likely cause significant delays in tallying results. In many states,
they can arrive after Election Day, and officials must open them by hand
and verify signatures. Already this year, some primary elections held
mostly by mail have remained unsettled for weeks after Election Day.
Democrats worry such delays could allow claims of fraud to gain
traction.
A person briefed by Joe Biden's campaign said the Democratic candidate's
staff was bracing for a "nightmare scenario" in which Trump declares
victory based on leading the in-person vote count in battleground states
on Nov. 3.
But in the ensuing days, as mail-in ballots from densely populated urban
areas are counted, his advantage disappears in what experts call the
"blue shift" - and the president claims the contest is being stolen from
him.
THE COURTS
States have varying laws regarding mail-in and absentee ballots -
signature matching, postmark requirements, application deadlines - and
any could prompt litigation by either Democrats or Republicans over
which ballots should be properly counted.
Presidential nominating contests held this year also exposed massive
challenges in delivering mail ballots on time, as election officials and
post offices were overwhelmed by the surge.
Voters who cannot get their ballots back in time through no fault of
their own could be effectively disenfranchised. That could spark legal
challenges in states where the race is decided by slim margins.
Litigation filed in individual states could eventually reach the U.S.
Supreme Court, as it did in 2000, when Republican George W. Bush
prevailed over Democrat Al Gore by just 537 votes in Florida after the
conservative-leaning high court halted a recount.
The current court's conservative majority has generally been permissive
of voting restrictions. But that does not necessarily suggest the court
would lean toward Trump in a dispute over the election results, legal
scholars say.
ELECTORAL COLLEGE
Perhaps even more worrisome than litigation is the possibility of an
Electoral College dispute, some experts say.
The U.S. president is not actually elected by a majority of the popular
vote. Under the Constitution, 538 electors – known as the Electoral
College – determine the winner.
In practice, the candidate who wins each state's popular vote typically
collects that state's electors, which are apportioned based on
population. The governor of each state certifies the electors' vote,
which takes place this year on Dec. 14, and submits it to Congress for
its approval.
[to top of second column]
|
President Donald Trump speaks at a roundtable on donating plasma
during a visit to the American Red Cross National Headquarters in
Washington, U.S., July 30, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria
In a new book, "Will He Go?" Amherst College law professor Lawrence
Douglas outlined a scenario in which the results in three swing
states – Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania – are so close that
both sides claim victory.
The Republican-controlled legislatures in each state, egged on by
Trump, submit their own certificates awarding the electors' votes to
Trump, even as the states' Democratic governors send separate
certificates giving Biden the votes.
States have occasionally submitted competing certificates in U.S.
history, most notably in 1876, when the election remained unsettled
for months. The dispute was resolved only after party officials
brokered a deal giving Republican Rutherford B. Hayes the presidency
in exchange for withdrawing U.S. troops left over from the Civil War
from Southern states, a move that helped usher in the Jim Crow era
of racial segregation.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that states could punish "faithless
electors" who cast votes for someone other than the winner of their
state. But more than a dozen states have no rules against faithless
electors.
Under the federal Electoral Count Act, Congress is responsible for
resolving Electoral College disputes, not the Supreme Court. But the
law is ambiguous, Douglas said, and a split Congress may not easily
agree on a solution.
"If you ask whether our constitutional legal system is designed to
deal with an electoral crisis, the answer is, it really isn't,"
Douglas said.
MILITARY TO ESCORT HIM OUT?
Some experts said they were most concerned about the lasting damage
to democratic norms if Trump refuses to concede defeat, even if
Biden is declared the winner.
Peaceful succession is a hallmark of U.S. democracy. The Supreme
Court's ruling in Bush v. Gore did not end the election, Douglas
said; Gore's decision to accept it did.
Biden has suggested the military might need to "escort" Trump out of
the White House if he loses but refuses to leave. Whoever is sworn
in as president on Jan. 20 will command both the armed forces as
well as executive-branch security agencies, like the Secret Service.
Trump's rhetoric could also leave millions of his supporters
convinced the election was rigged - and, perhaps, lead to further
unrest after months of protests over racial inequity.
"This is yet another example of the president seeking to
delegitimize the election process before it happens," Justin Levitt,
a constitutional law professor at Loyola Marymount University, said
of Trump's latest tweet. "That is deeply destabilizing."
Mark Brewer, an elections lawyer who is helping train Democratic
legal volunteers in Michigan, said the best way to avoid an extended
legal battle would be for Biden to win by a wide margin.
"Democrats have to make sure this election is not close," he said.
(Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Michael Martina and
Phil Stewart; Editing by Soyoung Kim and Alistair Bell)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |