Explainer: What might happen if U.S. election result is disputed?
Send a link to a friend
[November 04, 2020]
By Joseph Ax
(Reuters) - Despite incomplete results from
several battleground states that could determine the outcome of the U.S.
presidential race, President Donald Trump proclaimed victory over
Democratic challenger Joe Biden on Wednesday.
The premature move confirmed worries Democrats had voiced for weeks that
Trump would seek to dispute the election results. That could set off any
number of legal and political dramas in which the presidency could be
determined by some combination of the courts, state politicians and
Congress.
Here are the various ways the election can be contested:
LAWSUITS
Early voting data shows Democrats are voting by mail in far greater
numbers than Republicans. In states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin
that do not count mail-in ballots until Election Day, initial results
appeared to favor Trump because they were slower to count mailed
ballots. Democrats had expressed concern that Trump would, as he did on
Wednesday, declare victory before those ballots could be fully tallied.
A close election could result in litigation over voting and
ballot-counting procedures in battleground states. Cases filed in
individual states could eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court, as
Florida’s election did in 2000, when Republican George W. Bush prevailed
over Democrat Al Gore by just 537 votes in Florida after the high court
halted a recount.
Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett as Supreme Court justice just days
before the election, creating a 6-3 conservative majority that could
favor the president if the courts weigh in on a contested election.
"We want the law to be used in a proper manner. So we'll be going to the
U.S. Supreme Court. We want all voting to stop," Trump said on
Wednesday, even though election laws in U.S. states require all votes to
be counted, and many states routinely take days to finish counting legal
ballots.
ELECTORAL COLLEGE
The U.S. president is not elected by a majority of the popular vote.
Under the Constitution, the candidate who wins the majority of 538
electors, known as the Electoral College, becomes the next president. In
2016, Trump lost the national popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton
but secured 304 electoral votes to her 227.
The candidate who wins each state’s popular vote typically earns that
state’s electors. This year, the electors meet on Dec. 14 to cast votes.
Both chambers of Congress will meet on Jan. 6 to count the votes and
name the winner.
Normally, governors certify the results in their respective states and
share the information with Congress.
But some academics have outlined a scenario in which the governor and
the legislature in a closely contested state submit two different
election results. Battleground states of Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Wisconsin and North Carolina all have Democratic governors and
Republican-controlled legislatures.
According to legal experts, it is unclear in this scenario whether
Congress should accept the governor’s electoral slate or not count the
state’s electoral votes at all.
While most experts view the scenario as unlikely, there is historical
precedent. The Republican-controlled Florida legislature considered
submitting its own electors in 2000 before the Supreme Court ended the
contest between Bush and Gore. In 1876, three states appointed “dueling
electors,” prompting Congress to pass the Electoral Count Act (ECA) in
1887.
Under the act, each chamber of Congress would separately decide which
slate of “dueling electors” to accept. As of now, Republicans hold the
Senate while Democrats control the House of Representatives, but the
electoral count is conducted by the new Congress, which will be sworn in
on Jan. 3.
[to top of second column]
|
People fill in their ballots at Wakefield High School on the day of
the 2020 U.S. presidential election in Arlington, Virginia, U.S.,
November 3, 2020. REUTERS/Hannah McKay
If the two chambers disagree, it’s not entirely clear what would
happen.
The act says that the electors approved by each state’s “executive”
should prevail. Many scholars interpret that as a state’s governor,
but others reject that argument. The law has never been tested or
interpreted by the courts.
Ned Foley, a law professor at Ohio State University, called the
ECA’s wording “virtually impenetrable” in a 2019 paper exploring the
possibility of an Electoral College dispute.
Another unlikely possibility is that Trump’s Vice President Mike
Pence, in his role as Senate president, could try to throw out a
state’s disputed electoral votes entirely if the two chambers cannot
agree, according to Foley’s analysis.
In that case, the Electoral College Act does not make clear whether
a candidate would still need 270 votes, a majority of the total, or
could prevail with a majority of the remaining electoral votes - for
example, 260 of the 518 votes that would be left if Pennsylvania’s
electors were invalidated.
“It is fair to say that none of these laws has been stress-tested
before,” Benjamin Ginsberg, a lawyer who represented the Bush
campaign during the 2000 dispute, told reporters in a conference
call on Oct. 20.
The parties could ask the Supreme Court to resolve any congressional
stalemate, but it’s not certain the court would be willing to
adjudicate how Congress should count electoral votes.
‘CONTINGENT ELECTION’
A determination that neither candidate has secured a majority of
electoral votes would trigger a “contingent election” under the 12th
Amendment of the Constitution. That means the House of
Representatives chooses the next president, while the Senate selects
the vice president.
Each state delegation in the House gets a single vote. As of now,
Republicans control 26 of the 50 state delegations, while Democrats
have 22; one is split evenly and another has seven Democrats, six
Republicans and a Libertarian.
A contingent election also takes place in the event of a 269-269 tie
after the election; there are several plausible paths to a deadlock
in 2020.
Any election dispute in Congress would play out ahead of a strict
deadline - Jan. 20, when the Constitution mandates that the term of
the current president ends.
Under the Presidential Succession Act, if Congress still has not
declared a presidential or vice presidential winner by then, the
Speaker of the House would serve as acting president. Nancy Pelosi,
a Democrat from California, is the current speaker.
(Reporting by Joseph Ax and Brad Heath, Editing by Soyoung Kim)
[© 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.
|