...the executive is a co-equal branch of government, and the court can't force action, as it's the executive branch itself that has the power to enforce the law.

Further, courts themselves -- as several courts did in the 2020 pre-election cases -- could violate the law, which is obviously problematic. Additionally, elections officials all over a state and up and down the process ladder could refuse to certify this or that even at, say, the precinct level, creating problems. There is also the matter of Congressional certification, which could create further problems. Even post-certification, an actual elector could refuse -- and has refused -- to vote for the intended candidate.

Issues like these are exactly why we are having this conversation about roles and responsibilities regarding our elections. I don't want to get bogged down in minutiae involving particular states -- that's not the point. I'm talking about any situation where there is potentially irreconcilable controversy around the election and/or certification. At some point, somewhere, somehow, someone has to make a decision on the final result, and the question is where that power should and does ultimately reside, particularly in situations where the process in place has been corrupted.

[Post edited by Los Angeles Hoo at 06/30/2022 5:15PM]