The correct answer to this open question is the following.
In the case of Chiafalo v. Washington (2020), the Supreme Court ruled that it is constitutional for states to place restrictions on who electors can vote for.
I agree with this decision because voting in the Electoral College is a serious thing, and members of the college have to assume this important and serious role. That is why they are members of the Electoral College and expressed their intention to vote for the candidate they supported.
I think there would be no room for faithless electors in the US Electoral College. There is no reason for them to vote for other people if they originally pledge to vote for their candidates.
On July 6, 2020, the case of Chiafalo v. Washington was decided.
Women finally got the right to vote in the United States due to the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. This was the culmination of many years of hard work.
In February 1852, arrangements were ending up rare. The rancheros who had been driving meat groups into the valley and the donkey drivers who got onions, potatoes, spread and espresso couldn't get past the profound snow that secured the slopes encompassing the bars. So the Clapps and their neighbors lived for three months on flour, dull ham, salted mackerel, and corroded pork. Also, when the snow at last dissolved, spring surges started, clearing without end flume apparatus, log spans, long toms, supports, a recently completed sawmill and a few men. By mid-May, the dilutes quieted and crisp arrangements arrived. So did countless American newcomers. On May 25, Louise noted: 'Several individuals have touched base upon our Bar inside the most recent couple of days; drinking cantinas are jumping up toward each path; the fluming operations are quickly advancing, and all searches positively for an occupied and prosperous summer.' Some of these newcomers had battled in the Mexican-American War and had a tendency to see Spanish-talking individuals as foes.
