What is the legality surrounding the U.S. electoral college members becoming “faithless electors?”
<p>So with Donald Trump declared the next (45th) President of the United States of America this week, a lot of people are unhappy to say the least. And the discussion of the role and purpose of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">electoral college</a> has come up in many conversations.</p>

<p>Long story short Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, but Donald Trump has received the majority of electors.</p>

<p>But concept of electors <a href="http://nypost.com/2016/11/09/the-one-scenario-that-could-still-get-hillary-into-the-white-house/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">becoming “faithless electors” has come up</a> and according to some and quoted in the <a href="http://nypost.com/2016/11/09/the-one-scenario-that-could-still-get-hillary-into-the-white-house/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">above linked article</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>However, there is nothing stopping any of the electors from refusing
  to support the candidate to whom they were bound or by abstaining from
  voting.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Another article in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/09/us/politics/how-does-the-electoral-college-work.html?_r=1" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>The New York Times</em> elaborates on the concept and obligations of the electoral college</a> as well and <a href="http://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/articles/article-ii#section-1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this page on the website for the National Constitution Center</a> as well quotes relevant passages from the Constitution. More observations and analysis <a href="http://time.com/4560682/faithless-electors/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">from Time magazine</a>.</p>

<p>So the question is: Is this truly legal? Or is this all pie-in-the-sky hopes put forth by people who are hoping against all hope that Donald Trump won’t be the 45th President of the United States of America?</p>

<p>About half the states have some law against <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector" rel="nofollow noreferrer">faithless electoring</a>.</p>

<p>It turns out that the existing laws are toothless since they are not enforced but it's also not clear how often those laws have been put to the test. In <a href="https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=208.08&amp;year=2008" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Minnesota</a>, the elector's ballot is invalidated and a random alternate is selected (except if the presidential candidate has died or become mentally defective).</p>

<p><a href="http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=29A.56.340" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Washington</a> fines a faithless elector $1,000 and it is possible that we will see a couple of them at voting time, though it would be moot.</p>

<p>In <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/214/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ray v. Blair, 343 U.S. 214</a> it was observed that such pledges may be unenforceable, that is, there has to be a statutory means of enforcement as there is in Washington and Minnesota.</p>

constitutional-law us-constitution voting elections