Emily Murphy and a Writ of Mandamus

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Melbourne

She’s an employee of the executive government, Trump is president, and will continue to be so until January 20th. She has a moral, democratic and legal duty to follow the directions of executive government.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of our system. She has a moral, democratic, and legal duty to follow the directions of the legislative branch, as expressed in law. So does every other member of the executive branch in all matters covered by law. Including the president.

Trump, as head of the executive branch, should be doing that: he should be carrying out the laws passed by the legislative branch. His failure to do so does not impose a duty on the rest of the executive branch to fail in a similar fashion.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

Yes. Her boss is Trump but her employer is the American people.

[Hari_Seldon]

@ShadowFacts

But you are hardly the first person to bend the facts to suit their preferred narrative.

Moderating: Tone it down, both of you. No warning issued.

[ShadowFacts]

Sorry about that - I apologize.

[Max_S]

@Jimmy_Chitwood

What’s the argument that that “shall” actually imposes any relevant obligation on Murphy, though? […] nobody would argue that any of that language requires that she have made an ascertainment by November 20, 2020.

I thought I had something originally, but I noticed (as you point out) that the law lets her ascertain the President-elect and Vice-President-elect.

@Max_S

ETA: But then there's section 3(c)

~Max