4 ms·
I see now, thanks for clarifying. You're clinging to the independent legislature theory even after Trump's picks agreed, it's batshit stupid. Despite the prof
by klyrs 3y ago
I see now, thanks for clarifying. You're clinging to the independent legislature theory even after Trump's picks agreed, it's batshit stupid. Despite the profoundly idiotic nature of the theory, it still does not support the efforts of Trump to overturn the election through fraud and violence, which the Republican party has given its full-throated support to. But yeah, folks are still pretending that it's the Democrats who hate the constitution and rule of law. Good show.
- skissane 3y ago> You're clinging to the independent legislature theory even after Trump's picks agreed, it's batshit stupid. I don't interpret rayiner's comments as supporting the independent state legislature (ISL) theory. ISL claims that the constitutional power of state legislatures to regulate federal elections cannot be limited by state constitutional provisions or rulings of state courts. I don't see rayiner as making that claim here – he claims that when state law provides for popular election of presidential electors, the state legislature can repeal or suspend that law, even in-between the popular election and the formal nomination of the presidential electors. ISL would go further, and say that if the state legislature chose to do that, the state courts could not strike it down as a violation of the state constitution; I haven't seen rayiner make that claim anywhere in this conversation; but, if he doesn't make that further claim, what he is espousing is not the same thing as ISL.