An AG Opinion does not carry the same weight as a Court Ruling.

The impact is that the election results would be unable to be certified.

Of course if you want to take the appropriate PR move, you'd want to certify prior to your electors voting.

Good question of course.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-blocks-further-certification-of-pa-election-results/ar-BB1bmgvY

Election results do not equate to electors, for the most part.

"This order does not impact yesterday’s appointment of electors," Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said on Twitter Wednesday. "We will be filing an appeal with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court momentarily."

You've heard of faithless electors I presume.

I see... But either way, electors are not compelled to follow the popular vote.

Not compelled to follow their pledges, rather.

You do have a good question though, I'll toss it to Faith and if Rob has time, he might cover it.

I'm sure with Rudy's production and Flynn's (with the Sidney Powell possible quid pro quo angle), it's less interesting.

despite the possibility of electors being faithless, it doesn't look like there'd be enough to bring Biden below 306 and anyone house rep who is a democrat but whose district went for Trump would all the same likely choose to go against their districts wishes.

@Adam135, you just advanced to level 7!

I get that... It was more of a strategy question. If the Trump campaign's aim is to get a case in front of SCOTUS, why give them another at bat if you don't have to?

Faithless electors are extremely controversial.

As you could imagine.

People don't just go rogue all the time.

it's like political suicide

It's happened a fair few times in the US's history.

Oh yeah... We had some last election for both sides.

It very much would be political suicide in my opinion.

Faithless electors from a half % margin state with likely fraud though?

Wasn't the idea.

Was the idea that electors were the election itself.

Which isn't the case, pretty sure. They have some definite ties, but enjoining someone from certifying the results does not impact electors.

It **could** depending on state law.

But they're sort of two separate entities is my point.

Which is why I brought up faithless electors as an example.

Hope that clears things up.

Ah I see.

@Maw I saw an article that explained the PA State Judge Ruling also blocked the certification of down ballot races/measures. So, now the question is could the AG appeal only part of the ruling (the down ballot measures) and let the ruling stand for the presidential race?

@TaLoN132 Apparently your question will be covered today, so no worries!

Cool... No worries... Just curiosities.

Thanks!

Well curiosities will be sated.

(Hopefully!)

what do you guys think will happen in PA?

@Maw So, do you get to celebrate 2 Thanksgivings each year? I'm awfully curious today.

I think that today's show might indicate that they realize that they are unlikely to get anywhere in the courts - especially now that the election has been certified and the slate of electors set. This is a Hail Mary from the opposite end zone. Rudy pleaded with the legislature to invalidate the certified popular vote, but this might not even be possible: https://www.justsecurity.org/73274/no-state-legislatures-cannot-overrule-the-popular-vote/

I don't know anything about this site, but the argument seemed sound to me. It says that since Congress has designated that Electors are to be chosen on 11/3 this year, a state's legislature would have had to have voted on 11/3 on the slate of electors in lieu of a popular vote. Once the state legislature determined the manner it was to be decided - popular vote - the ship has sailed.