"JUST TO CONCLUDE BRIEFLY, THE COURT KNOWS THE INTERVENTION HERE WAS EXTRAORDINARY AND UNPRECEDENTED. IF COLORADO IS PERMITTED TO UNDO THE HUMAN -- BAKED INTO THIS SYSTEM OF PRESIDENTIAL SELECTION, THERE COULD BE A CHAOTIC OUTCOME. BY CONTRAST, MOST
ELECTORATES HAVE BEEN FREE IN MOST ELECTIONS AND HERE WE ARE TODAY. LEGAL DISCRETION IN 18 STATES AND A DECISION IN THIS COURT WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER TO APPROVE OF THE STATE'S NOVEL INTERVENTION AND LEFT WONDERING HOW THE STATES OVERLY RIGID INTERPRETATION COULD GO HAYWIRE. AS WE -- AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, IN CASE OF DEATH OR OTHER UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES, AND WHETHER THE COURT SHOULD KEEP WITH THE CONSTITUTION UNTIL MENDED, AND MAINTAIN INDIRECT ELECTION, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT BOTH SIDES HAVE A VISION OF PRESIDENTIAL SELECTION THAT IS IMPERFECT, BUT VARIOUS OUNCES AND SEPARATIONS THAT OUR CONSTITUTION'S DRAFTERS AND A MENTORS HAVE PUT INTO THE CONSTITUTION, ALL OF THOSE SHOULD BEGIN A ROLE IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL UNIVERSE. I BELIEVE THAT AS A. THANK YOU."