The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed with Colorado’s argument that the state should be able to remove presidential electors who ignore the vote of the people in a closely watched ruling that threatened to have major consequences in the upcoming election by reshaping the Electoral College. 

In a unanimous decision, the justices sided with Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s argument that if the state doesn’t have the ability to remove presidential electors bribery and political chaos could ensue. 

“Today we consider whether a State may also penalize an elector for breaking his pledge and voting for someone other than the presidential candidate who won his State’s popular vote. We hold that a State may do so,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in delivering the opinion.

---

---

Kagan said that states can instruct their electors “that they have no ground for reversing the vote of millions of its citizens. That direction accords with the Constitution—as well as with the trust of a Nation that here, We the People rule.”

Justices Stephen Breyer, John Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh agreed with Kagan’s ruling, which included references to the television show “Veep” and the Broadway musical “Hamilton.”

---

---

Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch filed an opinion concurring with their colleagues mostly along the lines of state’s rights.

The Supreme Court made the ruling in Colorado’s case after deciding in a companion case out of Washington state that states have the ability to bind electors to follow the will of the voters.

To read the rest of the Colorado Sun article, click here.