What happens if the Trump campaign’s lawsuits fail in court?
What happens if the Supreme Court refuses to hear any of the appeals?
What happens if a contingent election in Congress doesn’t happen?
Is it over?
Or is there still a path to re-inauguration for President Trump.
No matter what the media says, this race isn’t over.
This obscure law could be Trump’s final gambit to rightfully claim the presidency.
It is called the Electoral Count Act.
The concept is simple.
In fact, the Democrats tried it in 2017 and 2001 after the 2016 and 2000 elections.
Obviously, Democrats failed.
But with widespread allegations of voter fraud and data irregularities, President Trump could succeed with this route.
In short, Congress must certify the election results after each state certifies its results.
But the certification process can be challenged.
It just takes 1 member from the House of Representatives and 1 Senator to join forces.
Together, they can challenge the electors from any state, forcing a debate on the House floors.
YouTuber StateOfDaniel explains more. The relevant section starts around the 29 minute mark:
Even Politico has started reporting on the story.
There are multiple allies on Capitol Hill who are willing to fight for President Trump.
President Donald Trump’s arsenal for overturning the election will soon be down to one final, desperate maneuver: pressing his Republican allies on Capitol Hill to step in and derail Joe Biden’s presidency.
Although the Electoral College casts the official vote for president on Dec. 14, it’s up to Congress to certify the results a few weeks later. And federal law gives individual members of the House and Senate the power to challenge the results from the floor — a rarely used mechanism meant to be the last of all last resorts to safeguard an election.
But several House Republican lawmakers and aides now tell POLITICO they’re considering this option to aid Trump’s quest.
“Nothing is off the table,” said Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).
Gaetz pointed out that in January 2017, a handful of House Democrats took this precise procedural step before their efforts flamed out during a joint session of Congress presided over by none other than Biden, then the outgoing vice president.
“It is over,” Biden said at the time, gaveling down Democrats as Republicans cheered.
This time, Vice President Mike Pence will be in the chair for any potential challenges — a potentially awkward scenario as his boss continues to deny the reality of the election he lost.
Indeed, Trump lost the election. His legal battles have failed to stop states from certifying his defeat. And his bid to pressure state legislators to overturn Biden’s victory appears to be going nowhere. Congress — where Republicans are still largely in lockstep with Trump — is the last institution that could be a factor.
Here’s how Trump’s defenders in Congress may take a final shot at subverting the election, who might carry Trump’s mantle and why it’s almost certain to be more of a spectacle than a solution for Trump.
The framers declared that the presidential election isn’t official until lawmakers certify the winner. The voters, on Nov. 3, picked 306 electors for Biden and 232 for Trump. Those electors will cast their formal votes for president on Dec. 14.
An obscure 1887 law called the Electoral Count Act, and several subsequent updates, spell out the process, setting Jan. 6 after a presidential election as the official certification date and outlining vague, complicated procedures.
On that day, the House and Senate meet in a joint session at 1 p.m. — just three days after a newly constituted Congress is sworn in. One of their first orders of business is to pass judgment on the Electoral College vote.
That same federal law also gives a tiny number of lawmakers enormous power to challenge the results.
If a single House member and a single senator join forces, they can object to entire slates of presidential electors. They must do so in writing and provide an explanation, though there are no guidelines on how detailed it must be.
If they do, the House and Senate must retreat to their chambers and debate the outcome for up to two hours before voting on the matter. Each state’s electors are certified separately, meaning lawmakers bent on challenging the results have multiple chances to force lengthy delays.
If the Democrat-run House and GOP-controlled Senate disagree? That outcome has never been tested before, though it would likely give governors in key states — including the Democrats who lead Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan — a larger role.
There have been whispers of the Electoral Count Act.
However, it appears that most mainstream media members are refusing to cover the possibility.
Any concerns about The Electoral Count Act if 1887?? https://t.co/uA7VAVbqN0
— trudy wonder (@tru_wonder) November 26, 2020
It's never happened but the Electoral Count Act of 1887 allows state legislators to give electoral votes to the candidate they want instead of the winner. Trump was talking with MI and PA legislators. No confirmation in 5 weeks that law can apply. It's asinine but true!
— Benji (@NealGoodman8) November 26, 2020
We shall see #ElectoralCountAct
— Stitch Jonze 🦍 (@dan297Notorious) November 28, 2020
It’s not just Politico.
The New York Times confirms this is a possibility:
President Trump’s last-ditch efforts to reverse the election seem to come down to a far-fetched scenario, one in which Republican-led state legislatures choose the members of the Electoral College, overturning the will of voters.
Could it work? Election law experts are highly skeptical. And leaders of the Republican majorities in legislatures in key states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona and Georgia, told The New York Times this week through their offices that they saw no role for themselves in picking electors.
That has not stopped some high-profile supporters of the president, including the talk radio host Mark Levin and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, from suggesting that Republican-led legislatures should consider ignoring the popular vote in close-fought states won by President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. and handing their electoral votes to Mr. Trump.
This political gambit, to the degree that it’s an organized strategy at all, has a theoretical basis in law, according to experts. But if it were to proceed, it could cause widespread outrage and be seen as an attempt to subvert the democratic process.
Benjamin Ginsberg, until recently one of the Republican Party’s top elections lawyers, called the strategy an act of desperation, one that many Republican lawmakers would not buy into. “The most partisan Trump legislators might, but I believe enough would rebel at hijacking their constituents’ votes that such actions would fail,” he said.
Here’s how such a scheme would theoretically play out. The Constitution gives state legislatures the power to determine the “manner” in which electors are appointed to the Electoral College, the body of 538 people who formally choose the president. Every state has already done that, by specifying in its laws that the winner of the statewide popular vote is entitled to the state’s presidential electors (Maine and Nebraska apportion some electors by congressional district).
The Electoral Count Act, a 19th-century law, sets up the mechanism for how that takes place. It directs governors to certify both the election results and a slate of presidential electors to represent the will of the people. In general practice, governors certify electors chosen by the party of the presidential candidate who won their state.
The Electoral Count Act also says that in the event of “failed elections,” in which voters have not made a choice for president, state legislatures are empowered to step in and appoint electors. The 1876 law is ambiguous about what constitutes a “failed” election. But the law does contain a deadline for states to certify elections: the “safe harbor” date, which this year is Dec. 8. Electors chosen before that date cannot be challenged by Congress.
A flurry of lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign, most of which have been defeated in court, appear aimed at slowing down states’ certification timelines and possibly providing a pretext to declare a “failed” election.
Time will tell whether this will happen.
Hopefully it doesn’t get to the Electoral Count Act.
We hope that state legislatures resolve this issue, especially with all the evidence coming out.
There’s also the possibility of lawsuits moving forward.
But if worst comes to worst, then the Electoral Count Act is there as a final safety measure!