“Selective Constitutionalism”

Lawrence Lessig @ Medium Sep 16, 2017

Last week, we launched a campaign to raise the funds we need to bring an Equal Protection challenge to the winner-take-all system for allocating electoral college votes. Tons were really excited about the idea, and many have stepped up to help support it. That reaction was amazingly cool and I’m really grateful for the support. (It’s not too late — you can support us still!)

But there’s a particular kind of resistance that we should call out, and ask it to justify itself — call it, selective constitutionalism.

The most common reaction against our lawsuit says that it’s inconsistent with the purpose of the Framers of our constitution. They were not intending, it is said, to create a popularly elected president. They were intending to give states the power to select electors, who would then select the President. So, the argument goes, it makes no sense to argue that the principle of “one person, one vote” should force the states to allocate their electors in a way that respects equality. That principle, equality, this argument insists, is not part of the framers’ design.

Jason Harrow @ Medium: The Road To The Supreme Court

The Road To The Supreme Court Jason Harrow @ Medium Oct 5, 2017 The ultimate goal of the Equal Votes project is to have the U.S. Supreme Court find that the winner-take-all method of allocating electoral college votes violates the core “one person, one vote” principle...

read more


Tell your grandkids you helped save American democracy—join the grassroots effort to make our presidential elections more equal. We’ll keep you updated on our progress.



Help build this team—tell friends you know are frustrated by the way we elect our president to join you in the fight to challenge the Electoral College.


Just like every vote, every donation counts in a grassroots movement like this.
Our success depends on Americans who believe in this work chipping in.


Share This