By The Constitution of The United States in the election of a President "Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the LEGISLATURE thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress...".
We hear that the method of assigning Presidential Electors to elect a President of the United States may be changed in some States so that in effect, in those States Presidential Electors are awarded by means other than "winner take all" for the entire State.
Would this be a constitutional action by the State Legislature in question? Yes, it would. The manner of apportionment of the Electors is to be "in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct." Someone may ask, "but what about the popular vote?" There is not even a Federal Constitutional requirement that there be a popular vote. In times past, Electors have been chosen in several different ways, among them by direct appointment by the State Legislature and by vote in Electoral Districts. Someone may raise the question of the Voting Rights Act, but a mere act of Congress does not amend the Federal Constitution.
So let us stop and think. The most powerful office in the land may be won, because of the Electoral College, without regard to popular vote; it may be won by changing allocation methods for Electors; and the entire process does not really demand a popular vote at all really. It all sounds rather peculiar to me, and potentially a little dangerous.
The Electoral College serves no useful purpose. Some claim that the Electoral College protects the interests of less populous States. Hardly so in fact. California with its 55 Electors is important; a single individual's vote in California affects 55 Electors; a single individual's vote in some States affects only 3 Electors, therefore is only 1/18th. the force of a vote in California. The Electoral College concentrates the Presidential election into (1) populous States and (2) "swing States" that are not decided.
But let us not quibble over how the Electoral Votes are to be apportioned. The remedy to the problems that may be caused by the Electoral College is not to keep "winner take all." The remedy is to junk the Electoral College.
The people of the United States expect that the winner of a Presidential election win the popular vote. The winner of a Presidential election does not derive Constitutional authority from winning the popular vote presently, but that individual will lose creditability in the eyes of many without at least a plurality---really creditability is diminished as the winner drops below a majority.
The Electoral College should be replaced with election by popular vote, majority required to win, second election date if necessary, by Amendment to the Federal Constitution.