I’ve been reading the nonsense dribbled by William McCarthy here on a near weekly basis for years. We get it— you are far left. We even learned last week that your kid is a “hard-core Biden supporter” (didn’t know any existed). But a constitutional scholar you are not. McCarthy falsely claims, “The constitutionally-mandated senate role in receiving the list of electoral college electors was established in anticipation that one or more states might be unable to settle on an agreed list of electors, in which case the congress would have to step in and resolve the disputed electors through other rules delineated in the constitution.” McCarthy’s interpretation is farcically inconsistent with the plain text of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3, too much so to explain here. I refer the Times’ readers to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 for a more accurate explanation of the senate’s role in certifying elections, and Federalist 68 for the reasons therefore. As for William McCarthy, best stay in your lane, whatever that is, and leave constitutional scholarship to Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley.

Bjork Jones

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.