Supreme Court Rules States May Require Electoral College To Support Popular Vote In Presidential Elections

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that states may punish members of the Electoral College that do not support the winner of the popular vote in a presidential election, settling an issue that lower courts had been split on.

The decision comes as the country moves into election season, one that is expected to be extremely polarizing. This ruling will allow states the right to fine or replace “faithless electors,” or electors that choose to cast their presidential votes against the popular vote in a state.

Twice in the past two decades, a president has been elected by the electoral college and not the popular vote; when Donald Trump became president over Hilary Clinton even though he received 3 million fewer votes in 2016 and when George W. Bush became president over Al Gore in the 2000 elections, even though Gore won the popular vote by almost half a million votes.

The ruling looked at two cases, one from Washington state where three presidential electors voted for Colin Powell in 2016 and another elector voted for Faith Spotted Eagle and a case in Colorado where Michael Baca intended to cast a vote for John Kasich. The Washington electors were fined $1,000, and the Colorado elector was removed and replaced with a substitute who voted for Hillary Clinton.“

Electors are not free agents; they are to vote for the candidate whom the state’s voters have chosen,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote.