In a recent law review article, University of Chicago law professor William Baude writes, After the 2020 presidential election, the peaceful transfer of power can no longer be taken for granted. How well did our institutions respond to the challenges? What vulnerabilities in our electoral processes and loopholes in our laws represent the most critical threats for the future? In this Conversation, Baude shares his perspective on the 2020 presidential election and its aftermath—and particularly the efforts in certain states and in Congress led by President Trump and those who fought for him to overturn the electoral victory of Joe Biden. Baude explains how these efforts to subvert the election create a dangerous precedent. Baude contends that the courts and other institutions resisted the attempt to overturn the election reasonably well. But, he argues, we cannot be complacent about concerted attempts to undermine the electoral process, and the threats to the rule of law in the years ahead.

Subscribe to Conversations With Bill Kristol in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

There are 2 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. GlennAmurgis Coolidge

    And yet  – nothing on Russian Collusion 

    • #1
  2. NHINDIE Coolidge

    Baude is smart. This is the first time I’ve heard someone explain rather than just hyperventilate about Trump’s post-election efforts, and to put them in the context of what the Constitution says. Baude is correct about the need for public acquiescence to the norms or forms of government as outlined in the Constitution. And his concern about Trump’s norm busting is understandable. But how in the world (wanted to say HTF) can this conversation go on for an hour+ without an attempt to construct and confront the best case of those who have reservations about the conduct of the 2020 presidential election? Simple suggestion: make sure we have elections whose results we can trust rather than say we must blindly trust election results. We saw all kinds of gaming the system: gobsmacking amounts of Zuckerberg money going to fund Democrat get out the vote efforts, Democrat operative Elias spearheaded rule changes to vastly increase mail in voting, social media blackout of the Hunter Biden story, to mention a few ways the election was made a farce. Legal cheating, I think Peggy Noonan called it. The Trump team was outplayed before the election. And their post-election efforts were often buffoonish. But Trump voters are right to be ticked off at the stacked deck before their eyes. If we can’t all trust election results . . . if we can’t all say the game is fair, and we win some and we lose some, then the country will come apart. So Baude and Kristol, if you’re worried about public trust of elections, quit wringing your hands about it (yes, yes, it’s all very worrisome), and do something productive. Conservative state legislatures are preparing the way to support coups? Really? Aren’t they trying to tighten up the conduct of elections in their states so that we can have election we can trust? Encourage these excellent efforts, don’t dump on them.

    • #2