Cite as: 591 U. S. ____ (2020)
1
Opinion of the Court
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________
No. 19–465
_________________
PETER B. CHIAFALO, LEVI JENNET GUERRA,
AND ESTHER VIRGINIA JOHN, PETITIONERS
v. WASHINGTON
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF WASHINGTON
[July 6, 2020]
JUSTICE KAGAN delivered the opinion of the Court.
Every four years, millions of Americans cast a ballot for
a presidential candidate. Their votes, though, actually go
toward selecting members of the Electoral College, whom
each State appoints based on the popular returns. Those
few “electors” then choose the President.
The States have devised mechanisms to ensure that the
electors they appoint vote for the presidential candidate
their citizens have preferred. With two partial exceptions,
every State appoints a slate of electors selected by the political party whose candidate has won the State’s popular
vote. Most States also compel electors to pledge in advance
to support the nominee of that party. This Court upheld
such a pledge requirement decades ago, rejecting the argument that the Constitution “demands absolute freedom for
the elector to vote his own choice.” Ray v. Blair, 343 U. S.
214, 228 (1952).
Today, we consider whether a State may also penalize an
elector for breaking his pledge and voting for someone other