The real risks and unanswered questions of a possible 2024 Presidential Candidate deadlock.
In This Article:
- The Basics of a Contingent Election
- Unresolved Legal and Procedural Issues
- Potential for Partisan Procedural Warfare
- Faithless Electors and Their Impact
As the 2024 Presidential election draws near, concerns are mounting over an unprecedented scenario that could plunge America into volatile social unrest.
If Robert F. Kennedy Jr. garners enough electoral votes to prevent both Donald Trump and the new Democratic Party candidate from reaching the crucial 270-delegate threshold, the nation could face a historic constitutional crisis.
The 12th Amendment outlines a contingent election process, but significant gaps and ambiguities in these rules could lead to fierce partisan battles and prolonged legal disputes. This uncertainty, combined with the high stakes of a three-way tie, threatens to undermine the orderly transfer of power, potentially igniting widespread instability across the country.
The upcoming 2024 US Presidential election holds the potential for an unprecedented constitutional dilemma if no candidate reaches the required 270 electoral votes.
This scenario, while rare, is more plausible than ever, given the current political climate and electoral dynamics.
The Basics of a Contingent Election
In the event of an Electoral College tie, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution mandates a contingent election.
The House of Representatives would select the President, while the Senate would choose the Vice President. In the House, each state delegation casts one vote, with a majority of 26 votes required to elect the President.
The Senate, on the other hand, votes individually, with a simple majority needed to elect the Vice President.
This process, while seemingly straightforward, is fraught with potential complications. For instance, the newly elected Congress would cast these votes, meaning the balance of power could shift from the current composition.
The outcome would hinge on the results of the Congressional elections, adding another layer of uncertainty to the process.
Unresolved Legal and Procedural Issues
The 12th Amendment outlines the basic framework for a contingent election but leaves many questions unanswered.
One critical gap is what happens if the Senate is deadlocked on Inauguration Day. While the 12th Amendment addresses a House deadlock by allowing the Vice President-elect to act as President, it does not provide guidance for a Senate stalemate.
Legal scholars are divided on whether the Vice President can cast a tie-breaking vote for themselves, adding another layer of uncertainty.
Additionally, the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 might come into play if both chambers are deadlocked. However, its application to a tied election scenario is ambiguous. The act mentions succession due to death, resignation, or inability to qualify, but not due to an unresolved contingent election.
This ambiguity could lead to legal battles over who should assume the presidency.
Potential for Partisan Procedural Warfare
The lack of clear rules opens the door for partisan maneuvering. In the House, the majority party could manipulate the process by setting favorable rules, such as determining how state delegations cast their votes.
For example, they might stipulate that a state’s vote must reflect the majority decision of its delegation, or they could allow for a plurality decision.
In the Senate, the threat of a filibuster looms large, potentially delaying the Vice Presidential vote. The majority party might resort to extreme measures, such as refusing to seat certain members or changing Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster. These tactics could further complicate and delay the process, leading to a constitutional crisis.
Such procedural battles could drag on, with both sides employing every possible tactic to gain an advantage. This scenario could lead to significant delays, further muddying the already complex situation.
The judiciary might be reluctant to intervene in what it sees as internal Congressional matters, leaving the legislative branch to resolve these conflicts independently.
Faithless Electors and Their Impact
Even before the contingent election, the role of faithless electors could disrupt the process.
Electors who deviate from their pledged vote could either resolve an apparent tie or create one, adding another candidate into the mix for the House to consider.
The Supreme Court has upheld states’ rights to penalize faithless electors, but many states lack such provisions, leaving room for rogue votes to influence the election outcome. In 2016, ten electors cast votes for candidates other than those they were pledged to, highlighting the potential for disruption.
If faithless electors act in 2024, they could significantly impact the election outcome, either by breaking a tie or by introducing a third candidate into the contingent election, complicating the process even further.
The Bottom Line
The potential for an Electoral College tie in the 2024 Presidential election reveals significant gaps and ambiguities in the constitutional process. Unresolved legal questions, coupled with the potential for partisan procedural warfare and the influence of faithless electors, could lead to a historic and volatile crisis.
As Americans prepare for this high-stakes election, understanding these intricacies is crucial for anticipating and navigating the challenges that may arise. The nation must be prepared for a complex and potentially contentious path to resolving a tied election, with the potential for significant legal and procedural battles along the way.
Contributing Article: https://starkrealities.substack.com/p/gaps-in-electoral-college-tiebreaker
