LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Trump's ballot eligibility battle at the Supreme Court

I think the "conservatives" on the Court will figure out a way to ditch their states' rights banner for this particular case. It will not be a broad ruling allowing states to determine eligibility criteria.

The Court is now controlled by political hacks who will have a difficult time overcoming their partisan brainwashing by the Federalist Society.
 
They are hearing this case in the SC at this moment. I think they will leave Trump on the ballots on the due process issue--that he hasn't actually been convicted of leading an insurrection yet (although we all know he did). And I don't mind if he's left on the ballot. I think he should be decisively rejected by the voters.

This is actually right a the point I prefer--that he probably will be left on the ballot by the SC, with the SC later weighing in on the side of him not having immunity from prosecution. It all has him being jerked around and in a tizzy fit. That's right where I want him--suffering and being buffeted from all sides. I want him under pressure and in danger every minute of his day.
 
KeithD said:
They are hearing this case in the SC at this moment. I think they will leave Trump on the ballots on the due process issue--that he hasn't actually been convicted of leading an insurrection yet (although we all know he did). And I don't mind if he's left on the ballot. I think he should be decisively rejected by the voters.

This is actually right a the point I prefer--that he probably will be left on the ballot by the SC, with the SC later weighing in on the side of him not having immunity from prosecution. It all has him being jerked around and in a tizzy fit. That's right where I want him--suffering and being buffeted from all sides. I want him under pressure and in danger every minute of his day.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on this that the SC will allow Trump to remain on the ballot. The 14th doesn't say you can't run for office, only that you can't hold office. But I do want to see how they side step "states rights".

To me it seems Colorado has already ruled Trump did participate in an insurrection, which is the only criteria stated in the 14th. As such the state has exercised it's rights granted by the Elections Clause to not put Trump on the ballot.

Great fun!! I see an SC baking a pretzel here....
 
Fuzzy1975 said:
I agree with you on this that the SC will allow Trump to remain on the ballot. The 14th doesn't say you can't run for office, only that you can't hold office. But I do want to see how they side step "states rights".

To me it seems Colorado has already ruled Trump did participate in an insurrection, which is the only criteria stated in the 14th. As such the state has exercised it's rights granted by the Elections Clause to not put Trump on the ballot.

Great fun!! I see an SC baking a pretzel here....
Click to expand...
Given the "not yet due process" off-ramp opportunity, I don't think the SC needs to get into any of the other issues. I can also see them ruling that, for national-level position issues, an individual state's ruling doesn't overrule a universal application on the federal level.

I think the "he's not an officer of the government" position is downright nuts.
 
KeithD said:
Given the "not yet due process" off-ramp opportunity,
Click to expand...
Yes that's the pretzel making, a disqualification, without due process. But the argument before the court is not about does the 14th need due process before being implemented. It didn't when it has been used in the past...it's about a States right to remove a name from a ballot. Something that has happened back in the early 1930's. So there is a weak precedent there.
KeithD said:
I don't think the SC needs to get into any of the other issues. I can also see them ruling that, for national-level position issues, an individual state's ruling doesn't overrule a universal application on the federal level.
Click to expand...
Yes I can see them off-roading to this.
KeithD said:
I think the "he's not an officer of the government" position is downright nuts.
Click to expand...
They're just throwing stuff against the wall, hoping something sticks...
 
Granted, I think SCOTUS needs to comment on whether the section is self executing or whether Congress needs to act.
 
Fuzzy1975 said:
The 14th doesn't say you can't run for office, only that you can't hold office. But I do want to see how they side step "states rights".
Click to expand...
That's the question I've asked before.

As I read it, Election law allows the states to run their elections as they see fit within certain Federal guidelines. They essentially can decide who is, or isn't on their ballot.

However, he is clearly unfit and ineligible to hold office.

So ......

They allow the states to let him be on the ballots nationwide, or not. But they determine he cannot be sworn in.

What happens? Do some states let him run anyways?

Suppose they don't decide the eligibility issue and let the election run without it. Somehow, legitimately or not, he gets the Electoral College votes. THEN they decide he isn't eligible.

What happens? Doe his VP get it? Stefanik? Noem? Carlson? Abbott? Do any of us want any of them?
 
jaF0 said:
Suppose they don't decide the eligibility issue and let the election run without it. Somehow, legitimately or not, he gets the Electoral College votes. THEN they decide he isn't eligible.

What happens? Doe his VP get it? Stefanik? Noem? Carlson? Abbott? Do any of us want any of them?
Click to expand...
That is exactly the way I read it. He is disqualified, and the VP then is sworn in as President.
 
It would be funny if he was off all ballots and it will be funny if he is on ballots and loses again. Tough call, I just hope he doesn't win.
 
One other question.

The disqualification, if it happens, can be overturned by a 2/3rds margin in both chambers. Not either, both.

He gets the EC votes, SCOTUS disqualifies him

BUT, in the meantime, Rs keep the House and take the Senate back. What happens? Do enough Ds cave (in the interest of keeping the peace, nyuk, nyuk) to make the 2/3rds?
 
jaF0 said:
One other question.

The disqualification, if it happens, can be overturned by a 2/3rds margin in both chambers. Not either, both.

He gets the EC votes, SCOTUS disqualifies him

BUT, in the meantime, Rs keep the House and take the Senate back. What happens? Do enough Ds cave (in the interest of keeping the peace, nyuk, nyuk) to make the 2/3rds?
Click to expand...
That sounds more like a gripe than a question. Elected representatives vote on the interest of the constituents overall. So some may vote to keep the peace while others do not. It's subjective, not objective. They would need to determine whether they feel an override is necessary based on their interpretation and perspective. It certainly would be political rather than legal.
 
The hearing is over. Turley posted live on X as it was happening, giving reports on the questions and comments each justice made, as well as the responses from the lawyers. Sounds like it could be 9-0 or 8-1. Sotomayor might be the outlier.
 
dumb trump "we proved that case 100% 5 times over. 100% 5 times over."
 
Now if it had been BBC guys marching on the Capitol Building, it woulda been called The Footlong Rebellion 😂😂😂😂
 
What are the chances that this ruling from SCOTUS putting the issue to rest rather than just kicking this down the road when we'll be back here in December/January?
 
What really concerns me is seeing people cheer on arguments in court like some sort of cage match. These people don't want a court decision, they just want their political opponents destroyed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BrightShinyGirl
Supreme Court slaps Trump Down
2
Replies
31
Views
521
nowisthetime
nowisthetime
butters
Georgia's Supreme Court bounces trump-backed election changes
Replies
14
Views
307
pinkparkhorse
P
Rightguide
Another Trump Win In The SCOTUS
2
Replies
39
Views
593
JohnEngelman
JohnEngelman
M
The Supreme Court Killed Independent Agencies (except the FED)
Replies
1
Views
112
73Seahawks
73Seahawks
Lance_Castro
☆☆☆The Final Days?☆☆☆
Replies
11
Views
230
DeluxAuto
DeluxAuto
Back
Top