re: Colorado is trying to disqualify Trump from the ballot

quote:

---

Again, I suggest you read that document, rather than a generic internet definition of the term.

---

Why don’t you quote the relevant passage.

quote:

---

Could a textualist judge in Texas argue there is no standing for a case to remove him? And would that be a fair position to take?

---

"Remove" whom? I am going to assume that you mean "exclude" Trump from a Texas ballot.

The answer to your question would depend upon the identity of the plaintiff. Someone in Oregon would probably lack standing. A Texas voter would probably HAVE standing.

quote:

---

could a textualist judge rule in favor of a suit alleging Biden engaged in insurrection and remove him from the ballot?

---

Theoretically, yes. There would be nothing improper about a Texas voter FILING such a lawsuit, but there would likely be a problem finding any evidence to support the claim. If he could produce no evidence, he might potentially be subject to sanctions.

quote:

---

I had been thinking about the timing of the GOP nomination as a "trigger," but the same DOES seem to apply to the primary ballots.

---

I see a bomb being dropped by the democrats around the time the the GOP nomination rolls around to throw it all into chaos. It's going to be all about timing to disrupt Trumps nomination.

One question I cannot answer is, will some states wait until Trump get's the nomination to then afterwards try to remove him from their ballot? Is there a backup plan in place that the founding fathers thought of if certain states are successful in removing Trump from their ballots AFTER he receives the nomination?

Tell us of the charges that will be criminal that will hold up? Did Trump arouse criminal activity by suggesting a March to take over the government? They he suggest to arm oneself to defeat an enemy? Has he detailed a plan of take over? Or did he suggest that a VP send states back to view and replace if necessary electors? If he is guilty of this then why? Has the democrats not been guilty of freedom to express this themselves especially in last 3 republican wins? How about the infamous JFK electoral switch in Hawaii that was instrumental in his election? Would that be considered insurrection? This is stuff that’s been rehashed over and over but it’s not an invalid question. Because democrats are hasty in trying to block OMB from running do you not believe this is to similar to 3rd world politics? If Trump was kept off do you not think half the country might be a tad upset especially considering the stances of last 2-3 years on top of ploys proving allegations that have proved false? You know that democrats half used allegations of corruption in elections every time they lose in last 40 years

quote:

---

They keep coming from every angle. Ordinary common sense tends to make you ask why they’re throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, at a guy they’re not afraid of.

---

And they supposedly just had a record turnout for a POTATO based completely on people's disdain for Trump. Logic should dictate they would want him on the ballot. It would be a guaranteed win IF you actually believed the 2020 narrative.

quote:

---

I have been pondering any of these cases can be truly ripe until Trump is officially nominated by the GOP.

---

Since I was searching the Colorado site, Colorado law specifically says candidates in the primaries must qualify to hold office. Seems likely most states have this provision.

So, the way I envisioned this going down is that a SoS approves Trump's application to be a primary candidate, then someone petitions the SoS to remove his name based on 14(3), and then lawsuits ensue no matter which direction the SoS goes.

I'm sure the GOP also requires its candidates to be eligible to hold office, so one could also sue the GOP to eliminate him as a primary candidate.

In theory, these lawsuits could continue even if Trump is re-elected in an effort to remove him from office. I would rather SCOTUS take this up quickly.

I'm actually trying to squeeze a response out of you that leads me to believe you actually have thought out the position that you are such a strict textualist that you don't have to address any other logical questions around the practical application of this effort.

You've seemingly limited yourself to the opinion that someone CAN file suit to remove Trump from a state's ballot, which is something everyone understands. We're all talking about the legitimacy of such an effort. You likely don't believe it's legit but don't want to come out and say it because of who you are on this board.

quote:

---

In theory, these lawsuits could continue even if Trump is re-elected in an effort to remove him from office. I would rather SCOTUS take this up quickly.

---

In theory, running against an incumbent would qualify you for "engaging in an insurrection". No doubt if left to their own devices, dems will elevate this concept to the mainstream.

quote:

---

I'm actually trying to squeeze a response out of you that leads me to believe you actually have thought out the position that you are such a strict textualist that you don't have to address any other logical questions around the practical application of this effort.

---

Then write me a comprehensible question, and I will try to answer it.

The first of the two questions just makes ZERO sense. None. Remove? Who? Exclude? Lay out the procedural status of this hypothetical case.

The second question is comprehensible, but just stupid (or perhaps ignorant).

Filing this hypothetical Biden lawsuit would LEGALLY withstand a motion to dismiss, because you could PROBABLY state a claim within the statute, but you would ALSO probably be subject to a prompt "no evidence MSJ." If you could produce zero EVIDENCE that Biden engaged in "insurrection," you might be subject to sanctions.

quote:

---

SCOTUS would shoot this down quickly

---

sure.

hes not yet stood trial.

gotta get that snake in court.