According to a report by a bipartisan legal team, anywhere between 50 and 100 of Electoral College members who voted for Trump were ineligible.
In order to be officially elected president by the Electoral College, a candidate must secure the votes of 270 electors out of 538 total Congressional Districts represented in all 50 states. Trump narrowly won the election with 306 electoral votes. However, the report claims that 16 of Trump’s 306 electors didn’t actually live in their Congressional District, violating state statutes on residency requirements for electors. An additional 34 more are listed as “dual office-holders,” meaning that those electors are current elected officials in states that bar officeholders from also being nominated to the Electoral College.
“In North Carolina, for instance, “NCGS 163-1(c) [a state law] states, ‘One presidential elector shall be nominated from each congressional district…’ Yet, we have voter registration cards showing that numerous North Carolina electors lived outside the congressional districts they represented,” the report read, accusing North Carolina of seating 7 illegitimate electors in the Electoral College, along with three from Texas, two from Arkansas, and one each from Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, and Oklahoma.
In the section detailing the states that improperly seated electors that were dual office holders, the report claimed that 12 Florida electors were found to have held dual offices, in addition to four electors from Georgia, four from Kansas and Texas each, three electors apiece from South Dakota and West Virginia, two apiece from Iowa, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee, and one each from Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, and Utah.
“Ironically, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has issued a number of Advisory Legal Opinions on dual-office holding, was a presidential elector,” the report said.
The extensive report — which was authored by “a national team of roughly 15 pro bono attorneys, law students, and legal assistants who represent no client or entity,” cites multiple state and federal laws, as well as provisions in the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the amendment explaining the rules of the Electoral College) as justification for its claims. The executive summary of the legal briefing insists there is no political bias behind their findings.
“We are non-partisan—Democrat, Republican, and Independent,” the summary stated. “We live in different parts of the country, urban and rural, Red states and Blue states.”
Given the evidence, the report is asking members of Congress, who are slated to officially approve the results of the presidential election and Electoral College vote on Friday, to refrain from certifying them after all. Should a member of the U.S. House of Representatives file a formal challenge and objection when a joint session of Congress meets on Friday to certify Electoral College results, and should one member of the U.S. Senate sign on to that challenge, then each chamber will then debate the validity of the results for two more hours before meeting again.
The report aims to merely spark debate about the legitimacy of the 50 electors it accuses of being improperly seated, but will leave it to Congress to ultimately decide the election.
“We are not providing any legal advice,” a legal disclaimer in the report stated. “We strongly suggest that members of Congress employ their own legal teams to verify ou[r] work.”
Tom Cahill is a writer for US Uncut based in the Pacific Northwest. He specializes in coverage of political, economic, and environmental news. You can contact him via email at [email protected], or friend him on Facebook.