Trump’s Arcane Path to the Presidency

By Rudra Reddy As of today, every mainstream media outlet has called the presidential race for Joe Biden. Senate Republicans are scrambling to save control of the Senate by winning either or both of the runoffs in Georgia. Both Biden and Kamala Harris have given grand speeches declaring their intentions to unify all Americans, even those they previously compared to modern-day Nazis. From the surface, it would appear as if President Trump’s path to re-election has been foreclosed, and it is time for all conservatives to buckle up for the systematic change that the Biden-Harris ticket has promised to deliver. However, the American Constitution does not permit the mainstream media to determine presidential succession through projections. In order for a president to be elected, he or she must gain the support of at least 270 electors when they meet with Congress on Jan. 6. Regardless of what the final certified vote tallies are in each of the contested states, the electoral college provides President Trump with one obscure path to staying in the White House for another four years. This is not to say, however, that the legal remedies pursued by President Trump and other Republicans across the country lack merit. In Pennsylvania alone, the Trump legal team is suing to invalidate more than 600,000 ballots that were allegedly counted without granting access to a Republican observer. Given the heavy concentration of those ballots in Philadelphia County, a favorable ruling for the Trump campaign would almost certainly put that state in President Trump’s column. Additionally, Georgia is headed to a hand recount and audit of all votes cast, and the Arizona GOP has filed a lawsuit to enforce a hand count of all votes cast by precinct in accordance with state law. While all these lawsuits may possess some merit, President Trump will need to come back in the vote count and win Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania if he wishes to prevail without the use of any unconventional means. It would be impossible to win those states without invalidating a massive number of ballots in the Philadelphia and Atlanta metro areas. Any lawsuit that aims to do so will likely be appealed to the US Supreme Court, where chances are bleak despite the conservative majority on the Court. After all, throwing out hundreds of thousands of ballots under the scrutiny of rabidly partisan media would almost certainly end any institutional legitimacy the Supreme Court has. Any justices who vote for such an action will be uninvited from any prestigious gatherings at Harvard and Yale while allegedly nonpartisan “legal historians” will scribble about how the Roberts’ Court’s most lasting legacy would be sowing chaos in the country. Most importantly, the next time Democrats control all the levers of power in Washington, even the moderates like Joe Manchin will not think twice about packing the Court. For all these reasons, President Trump should not rely on the Courts to secure his victory. Despite all the talk about the courts being a check on democracy, there are limits to how far the judiciary can stray from public expectations to maintain institutional legitimacy. Therefore, the most plausible path to re-election runs through the Electoral College. While it is customary for state officials to seat a slate of electors who will vote for the candidate who is certified as the winner of the popular vote in that state, state legislatures enjoy expansive powers in the nomination process. Currently, Republicans hold the gavel in all the state legislatures in contested states such as Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. It is conceivable that Republican state legislators in the contested states seek to exert their authority before they seat electors. There are already several indications that state legislators are seeking to get involved in the presidential election. In Pennsylvania, Republican Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman committed prior to the election that Republican legislators will award Pennsylvania’s electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote in the state. More recently, he has hedged his previous comments, stating that awarding electors to the winner of the popular vote was what happened in “normal circumstances.” In Michigan, Republican state senators have called on the Democratic secretary of state to conduct a full audit before the election results are certified. In Wisconsin, Speaker of the State Assembly Robin Vos has announced a review to investigate mail-in ballot fraud and to look into the voter rolls in heavily Democratic Milwaukee. Given the fact that all three mentioned states have Democratic governors and secretaries of state, it is unlikely that investigations regarding ballot integrity as requested by the Republican state legislatures will go too far. At that point, the state legislatures will have two choices- either accept the certified results of an election they likely believe is suspect or nominate a competing slate of electors who would vote for President Trump. While state law in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan require the selection of electors who will vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state, such provisions likely do not take precedence over the 12th Amendment of the Constitution. Clause 2 of the 12th Amendment requires the selection of electors to vote for president “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,” giving broad discretion to state legislatures in this regard. If Republican state legislatures elect to send a rival pro-Trump slate of electors, it would create a host of conflicts on Jan. 6, when the votes of the Electoral College are opened. Furthermore, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution also requires the President of the Senate, Mike Pence, to open all the certificates and count the electoral votes in the presence of the Senate and the House of Representatives. This means that any disputes regarding rival electoral slates will be resolved by Vice President Pence and there is no doubt as to which slate he would recognize. While the Democrats would likely appeal such disputes to the Supreme Court, it is hard to envision six conservative justices disregarding the explicit text of Article 2 to reverse the outcome of the electoral count. If, after counting electoral votes, neither candidates has the necessary 270 electoral votes, the House of Representatives will vote by state delegations to elect the next president. At the conclusion of the 2020 elections, Republicans will control at least 26 state delegations, a narrow but decisive majority. If the election goes to the House, President Trump will likely prevail. It is important to clarify that outlining these possibilities is not the same as advocating for this path to be pursued. If President Trump wins through the electoral college without illustrating an iron-clad case for widespread voter fraud that could not be resolved in any other way, it is likely that this country will see riots and violence from coast to coast – with the possibility of a genuine civil disobedience movement emerging. It would almost certainly eliminate any attempt at ideological moderation as both political sides will attempt to do whatever it took to get elected. The American tradition of ensuring a peaceful transfer of power will end – as will public trust in the outcome of elections. This being said, it is clear from the last few days that President Trump has no intention of conceding, and his administration seems to be rejecting the possibility that its time in power might be coming to a close. Therefore, if judges do not entertain President Trump’s lawsuits challenging the election results, it is likely that his campaign might find a more favorable jury in Republican state legislators, many of whom owe President Trump their current jobs. Order Newt's Latest Book: https://www.gingrich360.com/trump-and-the-american-future

INNER CIRCLE MEMBER CONTENT