- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Wednesday or other SCOTUS experts, is this a trap?
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:33 am to beachdude
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:33 am to beachdude
quote:
It would not surprise me were it 9-0.
6-3 at best.
When it comes to DJT, there will always be 3 reliable votes against him. The Dems have that in their back pocket going in.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:37 am to skinny domino
quote:quote:
Wednesday
quote:
skinny domino
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:39 am to cadillacattack
For clarification to my earlier post, this is from page 9 of the ruling:
So, very small chance Trump will be omitted from the ballot
So, very small chance Trump will be omitted from the ballot
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:44 am to Godfather1
quote:
6-3 at best.
When it comes to DJT, there will always be 3 reliable votes against him. The Dems have that in their back pocket going in.
Democrats always vote for what's best for the Party.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 6:50 am to anc
quote:
Elections are state issues. If SCOTUS reverses this will it give precedent for elections to be federal?
The question was decided on a federal issue - whether the 14th Amendment (section 3)would disqualify Trump from being on the Colorado ballot bc of Muh Insurrection.
So - no- this wouldn’t be a federal takeover of state elections - it would be a question that arises under federal law. State courts can consider federal issues and federal courts can consider state issues.
State Supreme Court cases can go to SCOTUS if they involve federal questions. SCOTUS gets the final say on federal legal issues and state supreme courts get the final say on state ones.
Trump and the Colorado R party will go to SCOTUS and say the Colorado SCT was wrong in its interpretation of the US Constitution.
My hot take is that I think the CO decision is wrong bc Section 3 of the 14th amendment needs enabling legislation from Congress and congress passed a law where insurrection is a crime.
Based on the supremacy clause, the federal statute would preempt state balloting law. Meaning, the question of Muh insurrection must be decided under the congressional act.
The statute creates a federal right under that US statute to be tried and convicted in order to be considered a Muh insurrectionist
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:07 am to memphisplaya
quote:
They want the right to react with violence/protests
This. They're baiting the right so they can have a reason to start violently cracking down on dissent.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:54 am to Wednesday
quote:The case has been heard, and Trump was acquitted.
My hot take is that I think the CO decision is wrong bc Section 3 of the 14th amendment needs enabling legislation from Congress and congress passed a law where insurrection is a crime.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:55 am to anc
A state judge, tried to make a ruling using federal law. CO courts overstepped their bounds. USSC about to tell them to stay in their lane.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 7:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The case has been heard, and Trump was acquitted.
That doesn't make any sense.
That would mean that Congress would be impotent to assess a claim of insurrection without an impeachment proceeding. Clearly that would be an absurd reading of the clause.
There is no association with impeachment and the process to analyze potential insurrection. They're two completely separate processes with completely separate Constitutional sourcing.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:01 am to anc
Wednesday believed Sydney powell
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:01 am to udtiger
Yes, candidate qualification to hold the office of President is federal.The states must apply the requirements when putting names on the ballot.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:02 am to NIH
quote:
Wednesday believed Sydney powell
I believe she said she wanted to volunteer to work with Powell
Failing at that may have saved her license and criminal record
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:05 am to Dday63
quote:
This is about being qualified to run under the Constitution. This is not Colorado making up its own rules.
The 14th Amendment has added a qualification to running for State and Federal offices. That qualification is essentially not violating an oath you took by engaging in insurrection.
There is an open legal question whether this additional qualification applies to former Presidents and people seeking the office of President, but Colorado has interpreted the Amendment as including Trump.
If Arnold Schwarzenegger applied to be on the CO ballot, the SOS would be right to leave him off the ballot since he was not born in the US. If she planned to include him on the ballot, then the CO courts would need to get involved.
One can certainly argue whether this Constitutional provision applies to POTUS, and whether Trump engaged in insurrection.
But one cannot really argue whether CO should enforce the Constitutionally mandated qualifications for office.
The 14th says "or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
Would this apply to any members of Congress who has or will give aid to a terrorist organization who is an enemy of the U.S. like Hamas?
This post was edited on 12/20/23 at 8:06 am
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:07 am to NIH
To her defense, Sid just completed incredible work for Gen Flynn, then immediately flushed a great career down the toilet. It makes no sense.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Except that is what was done. More importantly the remedy, disqualification, was already considered. Trump was acquitted, and found qualified to run again.
There is no association with impeachment and the process to analyze potential insurrection.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:09 am to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
Gonna be fun watching you Groomers cry like little bitches when SCOTUS slaps this down
You think I'm gonna cry like a little botch when SCOTUS does what I expect it to do?
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:12 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Except that is what was done
Only via impeachment.
quote:
More importantly the remedy, disqualification, was already considered.
Under the rules of impeachment.
quote:
Trump was acquitted
In the impeachment process.
If USSC rules that this "acquittal" counts, then the clause is invalid except for impeachment purposes done in Congress.
Posted on 12/20/23 at 8:12 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:What an incredible point we've reached when client advocacy is politically criminalized, and considered flushing a legal career down the toilet.
then immediately flushed a great career down the toilet
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News