Explainer: 'Dueling electors' pose risk of U.S. vote deadlock
Send a link to a friend
[October 15, 2020]
By Tom Hals
(Reuters) - The 2020 U.S. presidential
election could be the most closely contested in recent memory due to a
deeply divided electorate and the possibility that President Donald
Trump will challenge widely used mail-in ballots, claiming without
evidence they are fraudulent.
Some election law experts are concerned the combination of factors could
lead to a crisis in which both political parties claim to have won the
same state, a phenomenon known as "dueling electors."
Below are details of how that might play out.
What are electors?
The U.S. president is selected by 538 electors, known as the electoral
college, rather than the popular vote. Electors are apportioned among
the states based on population and the popular vote in each state
typically determines which candidate receives that state's electors.
The Constitution and the 1887 Electoral Count Act govern the counting of
electoral votes and any related disputes. The electors will meet on Dec.
14 to cast their votes which are then counted by Congress on Jan. 6 in a
process overseen by Vice President Mike Pence in his role as president
of the Senate.
What are dueling electors?
States with close contests between Republican Trump and his Democratic
rival Joe Biden could produce competing slates of electors, one
certified by the governors and the other by the legislature.
The risk of this happening is heightened in the battleground states of
Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, which have
Democratic governors and Republican-controlled legislatures.
Some election law experts are concerned that an unprecedented volume of
mailed-in votes and legal challenges will delay the outcome of the
election for weeks, creating an extended period of uncertainty.
Trump has repeatedly said the election is rigged and made unfounded
attacks on mail-in voting, which tends to favor Democrats.
If early returns show a Trump lead, experts say the president could
press Republican-controlled legislatures to appoint electors favorable
to him, claiming the initial vote count reflects the true outcome.
Governors in those same states could end up backing a separate slate of
electors pledged to Biden if the final count showed the Democratic
candidate had won.
Both sets of electors would meet and vote on Dec. 14 and the competing
results would be sent to Congress.
Which set of electors would prevail?
Both chambers could agree to accept one slate of electors, which would
almost certainly put the matter to rest.
The chambers could also split, which is more likely if the Republicans
retain control of the Senate and Democrats hold onto their House
majority.
If lawmakers cannot agree on a set of electors, the country will find
itself in unchartered territory.
[to top of second column]
|
A general view of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on
October 14, 2020. (Graeme Sloan/Sipa USA)
The Electoral Count Act, often described by academics as
"unintelligible," seems to favor the slate of electors certified by
the state's governor, according to Ned Foley, a professor at Ohio
State University Moritz College of Law.
But Foley notes that some scholars and an analysis by the
Congressional Research Service have rejected that conclusion.
Academics have sketched out several scenarios. Under one, Pence as
president of the Senate, could throw out both sets of electors for a
state. Another contemplates that the House of Representatives would
end up choosing between Biden and Trump. There is even a scenario in
which the Speaker of the House, currently Democrat Nancy Pelosi,
could become the acting president.
Would the Supreme Court get invovled?
The Supreme Court may be called upon to interpret the Electoral
College Act to break the deadlock.
A Supreme Court ruling helped resolve the 2000 election in favor of
George Bush, but that case was about a recount in Florida and the
decision was reached before electors had met to cast the votes.
"I think there will be legal challenges," said Jessica Levinson, the
director of Loyola Law School's Public Service Institute. "But I
could see a court saying this would really be better left up to
Congress."
Has this happened before?
In 1876, dueling electors in three states deadlocked the election
until a deal was brokered days before Inauguration Day.
The dispute was resolved after Republican Rutherford B. Hayes became
president in exchange for withdrawing U.S. troops left over from the
Civil War from Southern states.
"I hope it’s a very low probability event but 1876 is a reminder
that it is not zero and we have come very close to falling over that
cliff in our history," Foley said.
(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Noeleen
Walder and Aurora Ellis)
[© 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. |