McPherson v. Blacker

Last updated

McPherson v. Blacker
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued October 11, 1892
Decided October 17, 1892
Full case nameMcPherson v. Blacker
Citations146 U.S. 1 ( more )
13 S. Ct. 3; 36 L. Ed. 869
Holding
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not require state legislatures to appoint their electors in the Electoral College on the basis of the popular vote. State legislatures have "plenary" power to allocate their electors however they want. [1]
Court membership
Chief Justice
Melville Fuller
Associate Justices
Stephen J. Field  · John M. Harlan
Horace Gray  · Samuel Blatchford
Lucius Q. C. Lamar II  · David J. Brewer
Henry B. Brown  · George Shiras Jr.
Case opinion
MajorityFuller, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 2
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), was a United States Supreme Court case decided on October 17, 1892. [2] The case concerned a law passed in Michigan which divided the state into separate congressional districts and awarded one of the state's electoral votes to the winner of each district. The suit was filed by several of these electors chosen in the 1892 election, including William McPherson, against Robert R. Blacker, the Secretary of State of Michigan. It was the first Supreme Court case to consider whether certain methods of states' appointments of their electors were constitutional. [3] The Court, in a majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Melville Fuller, [4] upheld Michigan's law, and more generally gave state legislatures plenary power over how they appointed their electors. [1] The Court held that Article Two of the United States Constitution also constrains the ability of each state to limit the ability of its state legislators to decide how to appoint their electors. [5] [6]

Contents

Impact in Bush v. Gore (2000)

The ability of states to determine the selection and apportionment of their electors was later reaffirmed in another Supreme Court case, Bush v. Gore (2000). [4] McPherson was also cited in Bush v. Gore by both George W. Bush [7] and by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist in his concurring opinion. Rehnquist admonished that "in a Presidential election the clearly expressed intent of the legislature must prevail." [8]

Impact in 2020 post-election legal disputes

The plenary power of State legislatures to appoint electors, as affirmed in McPherson, and as originally given in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution, was suggested as a means to settle the 2020 presidential election. This power, it was also argued, has usually been delegated to the people's vote, but the power can be recovered if the existence of fraud can be proven and/or if the legislatures' election statutes have been violated or circumvented, rendering the election illegal. [9] [10]

On December 11, 2020, the Supreme Court denied the state of Texas's motion to file a bill of complaint against four states, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia, that had awarded their electoral votes to President-elect Joe Biden. [11]

On December 5, Republican Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives Rusty Bowers pointed out, "it is true that the Arizona Legislature could alter the method of appointing electors prospectively. But it cannot undo the election of electors whom the voters already voted for  ... the law does not authorize the Legislature to reverse the results of an election  ... I cannot and will not entertain a suggestion that we violate current law to change the outcome of a certified election." [12] The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania said in response to the Texas suit:

Nothing in the Electors Clause permits a state legislature to enact a law "in defiance of provisions of [its] State's constitution."  ... When this Court said that state legislatures "possess[] plenary authority," it was referring to a legislature's authority to choose a particular "manner" for selecting presidential electors: "by joint ballot," or by "concurrence of the two houses," or by "popular vote," whether by "general ticket" or by congressional "districts." McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 25 (1892). As the Court has made clear, "[t]he legislative power is the supreme authority, except as limited by the constitution of the state."  ... Taking a quote from McPherson out of context, Texas suggests that this plenary power permits a state legislature to nullify the will of the electorate and select its own electors  ... There is no support in McPherson for such an extraordinarily antidemocratic proposition. [13]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Article Two of the United States Constitution</span> Portion of the US Constitution regarding the executive branch

Article Two of the United States Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government, which carries out and enforces federal laws. Article Two vests the power of the executive branch in the office of the President of the United States, lays out the procedures for electing and removing the President, and establishes the President's powers and responsibilities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1804 amendment regulating presidential elections

The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides the procedure for electing the president and vice president. It replaced the procedure in Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, under which the Electoral College originally functioned. The amendment was proposed by Congress on December 9, 1803, and was ratified by the requisite three-fourths of state legislatures on June 15, 1804. The new rules took effect for the 1804 presidential election and have governed all subsequent presidential elections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2000 United States presidential election</span>

Presidential elections were held in the United States on November 7, 2000. Republican nominee Governor George W. Bush of Texas, the eldest son of 41st U.S. President George H. W. Bush, narrowly defeated incumbent Democratic Vice President Al Gore. It was the fourth of five U.S. presidential elections, and the first since 1888, in which the winning candidate lost the popular vote, and is considered one of the closest U.S. presidential elections in history, with long-standing controversy about the result. Gore conceded the election on December 13 after the Supreme Court issued its decision.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Electoral College</span> Electors of the U.S. president and vice president

In the United States, the Electoral College is the group of presidential electors that is formed every four years during the presidential election for the sole purpose of voting for the president and vice president. This process is described in Article Two of the Constitution. The number of electoral votes exercised by each state is equal to that state's congressional delegation which is the number of Senators (two) plus the number of Representatives for that state. Each state appoints electors using legal procedures determined by its legislature. Federal office holders, including senators and representatives, cannot be electors. Additionally, the Twenty-third Amendment granted the federal District of Columbia three electors. A simple majority of electoral votes is required to elect the president and vice president. If no candidate achieves a majority, a contingent election is held by the House of Representatives, to elect the president, and by the Senate, to elect the vice president.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court on December 12, 2000, that settled a recount dispute in Florida's 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. On December 8, the Florida Supreme Court had ordered a statewide recount of all undervotes, over 61,000 ballots that the vote tabulation machines had missed. The Bush campaign immediately asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the decision and halt the recount. Justice Antonin Scalia, contending that all the manual recounts being performed in Florida's counties were illegitimate, urged his colleagues to grant the stay immediately. On December 9, the five conservative justices on the Court granted the stay, with Scalia citing "irreparable harm" that could befall Bush, as the recounts would cast "a needless and unjustified cloud" over Bush's legitimacy. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that "counting every legally cast vote cannot constitute irreparable harm." Oral arguments were scheduled for December 11.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Faithless elector</span> Elector who does not vote for the candidate for whom they had pledged to vote

In the United States Electoral College, a faithless elector is generally a party representative who does not have faith in the election result within their region and instead votes for another person for one or both offices, or abstains from voting. As part of United States presidential elections, each state legislates the method by which its electors are to be selected. Many states require electors to have pledged to vote for the candidates of their party if appointed. The consequences of an elector voting in a way inconsistent with their pledge vary from state to state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral Commission (United States)</span> 1877 US commission

The Electoral Commission, sometimes referred to as the Hayes-Tilden or Tilden-Hayes Electoral Commission, was a temporary body created by the United States Congress on January 29, 1877, to resolve the disputed United States presidential election of 1876. Democrat Samuel J. Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes were the main contenders in the election. Tilden won 184 undisputed electoral votes, one vote shy of the 185 needed to win, to Hayes' 165, with 20 electoral votes from four states unresolved. Both Tilden and Hayes electors submitted votes from these states, and each claimed victory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Popular Vote Interstate Compact</span> U.S. agreement on presidential elections

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential ticket wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The compact is designed to ensure that the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president, and it would come into effect only when it would guarantee that outcome.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rehnquist Court</span> Period of the US Supreme Court from 1986 to 2005

The Rehnquist Court was the period in the history of the Supreme Court of the United States during which William Rehnquist served as Chief Justice. Rehnquist succeeded Warren E. Burger as Chief Justice after the latter's retirement, and Rehnquist held this position until his death in 2005, at which point John Roberts was nominated and confirmed as Rehnquist's replacement. The Rehnquist Court is generally considered to be more conservative than the preceding Burger Court, but not as conservative as the succeeding Roberts Court. According to Jeffrey Rosen, Rehnquist combined an amiable nature with great organizational skill, and he "led a Court that put the brakes on some of the excesses of the Earl Warren era while keeping pace with the sentiments of a majority of the country."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">President-elect of the United States</span> Winner of the U.S. presidential election before inauguration

The president-elect of the United States is the candidate who has presumptively won the United States presidential election and is awaiting inauguration to become the president. There is no explicit indication in the U.S. Constitution as to when that person actually becomes president-elect, although the Twentieth Amendment uses the term "president-elect", thereby giving the term constitutional basis. It is assumed the Congressional certification of votes cast by the Electoral College of the United States – occurring after the third day of January following the swearing-in of the new Congress, per provisions of the Twelfth Amendment – unambiguously confirms the successful candidate as the official "president-elect" under the U.S. Constitution. As an unofficial term, president-elect has been used by the media since at least the latter half of the 19th century and was in use by politicians since at least the 1790s. Politicians and the media have applied the term to the projected winner, even on election night, and very few who turned out to lose have been referred to as such.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States presidential election</span> An election in United States of America

The election of the president and for vice president of the United States is an indirect election in which citizens of the United States who are registered to vote in one of the fifty U.S. states or in Washington, D.C., cast ballots not directly for those offices, but instead for members of the Electoral College. These electors then cast direct votes, known as electoral votes, for president and for vice president. The candidate who receives an absolute majority of electoral votes is then elected to that office. If no candidate receives an absolute majority of the votes for president, the House of Representatives elects the president; likewise if no one receives an absolute majority of the votes for vice president, then the Senate elects the vice president.

Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, 531 U.S. 70 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court decision involving Florida voters during the 2000 presidential election. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court requested clarification from the Florida Supreme Court regarding the decision it had made in Palm Beach County Canvassing Board v. Harris . Shortly after the Florida Supreme Court provided those clarifications on December 11, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved the election in favor of George W. Bush over Al Gore in the case of Bush v. Gore.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1892 United States presidential election in Michigan</span>

The 1892 United States presidential election in Michigan took place on November 8, 1892. All contemporary 44 states were part of the 1892 United States presidential election. Voters chose 14 electors to the Electoral College, which selected the president and vice president.

Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. 578 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case on the issue of "faithless electors" in the Electoral College stemming from the 2016 United States presidential election. The Court ruled unanimously, by a vote of 9–0, that states have the ability to enforce an elector's pledge in presidential elections. Chiafalo deals with electors who received US$1,000 fines for not voting for the nominees of their party in the state of Washington. The case was originally consolidated with Colorado Department of State v. Baca, 591 U.S. ___ (2020), a similar case based on a challenge to a Colorado law providing for the removal and replacement of an elector who does not vote for the presidential candidate who received the most votes in the state, with the electors claiming they have discretion to vote as they choose under the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution. On March 10, 2020, Justice Sonia Sotomayor recused herself in the Colorado case due to a prior relationship to a respondent, and the cases were decided separately on July 6, 2020. Baca was a per curiam decision that followed from the unanimous ruling in Chiafalo against the faithless electors and in favor of the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electoral Count Act</span> United States law governing the counting of electoral votes

The Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) is a United States federal law that added to procedures set out in the Constitution of the United States for the counting of electoral votes following a presidential election. In its unamended form, it last governed at the time of the 2021 United States Electoral College vote count. The Act has since been substantially amended by the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022.

The independent state legislature theory or independent state legislature doctrine (ISL) is a judicially rejected legal theory that posits that the Constitution of the United States delegates authority to regulate federal elections within a state to that state's elected lawmakers without any checks and balances from state constitutions, state courts, governors, ballot initiatives, or other bodies with legislative power. In June 2023, in the case Moore v. Harper, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution does not give state legislatures sole power over elections and rejected the ISL.

Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1 (2023), is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that rejected the independent state legislature theory (ISL), a theory that asserts state legislatures have sole authority to establish election laws for federal elections within their respective states without judicial review by state courts, without presentment to state governors, and without constraint by state constitutions. The case arose from the redistricting of North Carolina's districts by its legislature after the 2020 United States census, which the state courts found to be too artificial and partisan, and an extreme case of gerrymandering in favor of the Republican Party.

There is ongoing legal debate about the constitutionality of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in the United States. At issue are interpretations of the Compact Clause of Article I, Section X, and states' plenary power under the Presidential Electors Clause of Article II, Section I.

References

  1. 1 2 Kirby, James C. (Summer 1962). "Limitations on the Power of State Legislatures over Presidential Elections". Law and Contemporary Problems. 27 (3): 495–509. doi:10.2307/1190592. JSTOR   1190592.
  2. McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892).
  3. Zadrozny, John (January 1, 2003). "The Myth of Discretion: Why Presidential Electors Do Not Receive First Amendment Protection". CommLaw Conspectus. 11 (1): 165–184.
  4. 1 2 Bomboy, Scott (December 20, 2016). "Electoral College a rare topic of discussion at Supreme Court". National Constitution Center. Retrieved March 20, 2019.
  5. Hasen, Richard L. (December 6, 2007). "When 'Legislature' May Mean More than 'Legislature': Initiated Electoral College Reform and the Ghost of Bush v. Gore". Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. Rochester, NY. SSRN   1065421.
  6. Pleasants, J. (September 20, 2004). Hanging Chads: The Inside Story of the 2000 Presidential Recount in Florida. Springer. pp. 54–55. ISBN   9781403973405.
  7. Katyal, Neal Kumar (December 1, 2000). "Protecting and preserving Florida's process". CNN. Retrieved March 21, 2019.
  8. Rehnquist, William H. (December 13, 2000). "George W. Bush vs. Al Gore". Los Angeles Times. ISSN   0458-3035 . Retrieved March 21, 2019.
  9. Stern, Mark (March 13, 2020). "Trump Can't Cancel the Election. But States Could Do It for Him". Slate.com. Retrieved November 11, 2020.
  10. "John Eastman Testimony During Georgia Senate Election Hearing". YouTube . December 4, 2020. Retrieved December 7, 2020.
  11. "ORDER IN PENDING CASE 155, ORIG. TEXAS V. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL" (PDF). www.supremecourt.gov. Retrieved December 12, 2020.
  12. Bowers, Rusty (December 5, 2020). "Speaker Bowers addresses call for the Legislature to overturn 2020 certified election". Gila (AZ) Herald. Retrieved December 8, 2020.
  13. Shapiro, Josh. "OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, TEMPROARY[sic] RESTRAINING ORDER, OR STAY" (PDF). Retrieved May 4, 2021.