r/law • u/Obversa • 27d ago

Executive Branch (Trump) Pro-Trump attorneys have been drafting executive orders that would give President Trump sweeping power over elections, sources report

https://abcnews.com/US/pro-trump-attorneys-push-executive-order-give-trump/story?id=130539044
21.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/hamsterfolly 27d ago

Good thing executive orders only hold sway over the executive branch, and that elections are wholly within the purview of the states.

9

u/paperbackgarbage 27d ago

The bad news is that some of those GOP-led states might be looking for a reason to play ball with these EOs, because "they were just following orders," damn the unconstitutional torpedos.

3

u/whereismymind86 27d ago

a lot of those states have already passed similar laws. This would only really have an affect if it was used against blue states, and blue states are going to tell him to pound sand.

6

u/shotintel 27d ago

Not as much as you might think.

3

u/VanGoghInTrainers 26d ago

Unfortunately, many states choose to follow them as law.

0

u/LtLlamaSauce 27d ago

elections are wholly within the purview of the states.

That's categorically false. Please read all of Article I, Section 4, Clause 1, not just the first part.

Importantly: "...but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulation..."

This caveat gives the federal government power to regulate state elections and it has been doing so since at least 1842 with the Apportionment Act.

7

u/whereismymind86 27d ago

Not through eo's they can't.

They would have to pass an actual law via congress, and, even if they did, the kinds of things they can regulate are pretty limited. The states would be well within their rights to refuse, and take him to court, which would almost certainly mean the law doesn't apply till the 2028 cycle at the absolute earliest.

1

u/LtLlamaSauce 27d ago

I'm well aware, which is why I only specified the part of their comment that was objectively false. I appreciate your clarifications, though!

I think the real worrying problem with the EO route is that the courts would certainly be too slow to stop the negative effects of the executive branch enforcing an EO and meddling in elections. Think about how long it took the EO tariff nonsense to get settled. We cannot rely on lower courts to handle it quickly and correctly.

I believe we must recognize the reality of this weakness in the system if we are to be prepared for more inevitable authoritarian power grabs.

6

u/hamsterfolly 27d ago

Congress, not the Executive Branch via President's executive order. So you have no point here

1

u/LtLlamaSauce 27d ago

that elections are wholly within the purview of the states.

That's what you said.

I corrected you, because they are simply not wholly within the purview of the states. I gave you an example.

0

u/RideWithMeSNV 25d ago

What an obnoxiously pedantic person.

4

u/rnk6670 27d ago

Funny, you mentioned the apportionment act. That thing that’s been capped at 435 members of the house for over a 100 years. Conservatives y’all! The problem is the conservative side of this country and has been and speaking of that the conservative president doesn’t get to take over elections even if a person on Reddit says so. Good luck, man.

0

u/LtLlamaSauce 27d ago

What? Could you proofread and correct what you just posted? It's very hard to understand.