Three weeks ago the Supreme Court decided what had once seemed like an obscure corner of constitutional law, but which might have huge ramifications for this year's presidential election and beyond: The court ruled unanimously that states could punish or remove members of the Electoral College who refuse to vote for the candidate they were pledged to support.
The "faithless elector" decision is the topic of the latest installment of our podcast partnership with The Democracy Group, a podcast network at Penn State University, to share thought-provoking discussions about efforts to fix the American political system.
In this episode, Democracy Works podcast host and producer Jenna Spinelle leads a discussion with:
- Lawrence Lessig, Harvard law professor and prominent democracy reform advocate who argued before the court that electors should be free to vote as they please.
- Meredith McGehee, executive director of Issue One, one of the advocacy groups that filed briefs in the case arguing the states should have the power to punish electors who go rogue.
- Michael Baranowski, a political scientist at Northern Kentucky University who is focused on the practical implications of the court's decision.
- How much do you know about the Electoral College? - The Fulcrum ›
- High court says states can require electors to be faithful - The Fulcrum ›
- Allow us to punish faithless electors, nearly half the states ask ... ›
- Faithless electors decision doesn't address democracy's ills - The ... ›
- Lessig's group shifts focus to people, not politicians - The Fulcrum ›