In an age when liberal extremists reject the rule of law, the U.S. Supreme Court appears ready to ensure election integrity by supporting penalties against faithless Electoral College appointees.
A pair of cases — Chiafalo v. Washington and Baca v. Colorado — made their way through the court system stemming from two individuals who took an oath to fulfill their electoral vote responsibilities and did not. Michael Baca and Bret Chiafalo were a pair of progressive extremist Bernie Sanders supporters from Colorado and Washington, respectively. They took an oath to deliver their votes to whichever presidential candidate won the popular vote in their state. But the two Democrat activists never envisioned that now-President Donald Trump would handily win.
It appears Baca and Chiafalo were less than honest about carrying out their sworn duties. Based on false media reports and erroneous polling data, they believed it was only a difference would be handing Hillary Clinton the presidency instead of Sanders. When the Republican won going away, the pair hatched a scheme to subvert the will of the people, much like the Democrat Deep State operatives at the FBI and Justice Department did by spying and undermining the Trump Campaign.
“The fact that Donald Trump is a climate denialist, I thought that is a very big danger, along with a number of other issues,” Baca said, whose mother is reportedly a former Democrat Colorado state senator.
Rather than fulfill their sworn obligation, the pair decided to become “faithless” and change their votes. In that moment, Baca and Chiafalo agreed to conspire with other anti-Trump politicians in an effort to rig the election in Hillary’s favor.
“So, what we decided to do at that point was to put together a group to try to get Republican electors to vote for a different Republican to keep Trump under 270,” Chiafalo reportedly confessed about why he deferred to former General Colin Powell.
Calling themselves the Hamilton Electors, they courted others across the country who had misgivings about the Republican firebrand. In a quid pro quo, Baca and Chiafalo said they would hand their votes to a Republican instead of Hillary in exchange for others rejecting the will of the people. In Washington State, a $1,000 fine was levied for the faithless act. In Colorado, Baca was removed from his post for crossing out Clinton’s name and writing in John Kasich, the former governor of Ohio who ran against Trump during the 2016 GOP primary.
With Democrats pulling every devious trick in the book to win in November, the high court decided to resolve the constitutional question of whether Electoral College voters can be punished for what amounts to perjury. Baca and Chiafalo, among others, took a sworn and legally-binding oath to ensure the integrity of their constituents’ vote.
It’s an odd twist that Democrats threw Hillary under the bus in an effort to deny President Trump the Oval Office. But that very strategy highlights just how far today’s leftists are willing to go to usurp power.
Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh indicated that allowing faithless voters to cast the ballot based on their personal preferences or conduct a form of political insurrection would create election “chaos.” Chief Justice John Roberts appeared skeptical that a few individuals could decide who sits in the White House regardless of voter outcomes. Justice Clarence Thomas mocked attorneys by saying words to the effect that “Frodo Baggins” could be elected president.
It appears the conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court will continue to back the rule of law. Left-wing activists may be inclined to vote in favor of faithless electors, hoping to upend President Trump’s re-election bid.
