Giving The Insurrectionist The Significant Finger

His legal team just gave the CO action fuel...

 

Isn’t he getting kicked off the primary ballot? If all blue states do this, he won’t win the Republican primary. I’m not exactly sure how the Republicans primary works, but kicking him off the ballot in New York, California and a few other blue states would make it tough to win.

 

It’s one of the most bizarre arguments to claim that the President isn’t an officer. It is literally called “The Office of the President”

 

This is speculation on my part but I guess Trump wins the case for being on the ballot but loses the case that he has absolute immunity regarding actions he took while
In office.

 

That is my guess as well.

 

My guess as well... the ussc will try to walk the fine line of protecting trump's ability to become president again and at least the barest appearance to protect our system of laws.

 

Wrong thread

 

I guess that Trump loses both. The absolute immunity case is a joke and just filed to waste time and run out the clock. For the other case ...

Colorado used a prior Neil Gorsuch ruling (pre-USSC) as a basis for the state of Colorado barring people from the primary and general ballots. Colorado, unlike other states, has control of who can be on their state's ballots.

Also a clear textual reading of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not favor Trump at all.

As a finding of fact, the CO courts found that Trump was part of the Jan 6th insurrection. Higher level courts including the federal courts and the USSC usually will not dispute facts found by the lower courts, since the lower courts have first hand experience listening to the testimony given to their courts.

As a finding of law, the CO Supreme Court found that Trump had taken a prior oath to support the Constitution and that as POTUS Trump was an officer, as textually referenced in Section 3.

The conservative USSC justices would have to ignore a clear textual reading of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, despite the fact that they prefer clear textual readings. The conservative USSC justices would have to also ignore the finding of facts from the CO courts, despite the precedents of not challenging lower court finding of facts.

There is very little wiggle room for the USSC to dance around this issue. Yet ... I suspect that this will be a 5-4 decision ... not in favor of Trump.

 

I brought this up earlier but my speculation is they will find a way to side step the text of the 14th and CO law. They might do something like make an equal protection argument regarding voters being able to vote on a
Presidential candidate and or they might a procedural argument. Another possibility I’ve seen is a separation of powers argument that it is up to Congress to empower that clause.

 

Sidestepping the CO law would have to have a strong Constitutional basis ... since the federal courts usually step lightly into nullifying a state's law.

But I am 51/49 on this. The USSC can just say more or less that Section 3 is stupid and unenforceable ... all the while pretending the 2nd Amendment supports unregulated military style weapons with maximum capacity magazines ... for reasons. Basically the USSC may vary well make a political decision favoring their base, forcing facts to fit the desired narrative/outcome. FWIW I will be drop dead shocked if Alito or Thomas rule against Trump.

Possibly the USSC will realized if they rule against Trump that his supporters will seek a 2nd Amendment solution ... that the USSC justices would support in theory ... until the angry, well armed mob is on their home's front lawn.

 

So now he wants to campaign on overturning Obamacare again? The GOP really thinks that, combined with the most hated man to occupy the presidency in modern times and doubling down on abortion restrictions, is a winning message?

A party that stands for nothing more than one wannabe dictator's grievances.

 

Good! We will need all the help we can get to disperse the 24/7 lying machine of maga............Obama knows how to fire up a crowd