- 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
Place your bets now for what SCOTUS does with the Colorado Ballot case
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:52 am
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:52 am
My prediction:
Roberts writes a majority opinion where he crafts a very narrow reversal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision on entirely esoteric procedural grounds that raises more questions and confusion than it answers. Kav and maybe Kagan support it. He doesn’t touch the merits. He doesn’t discuss that the Colorado communists read out section 5 of the 14th A.
Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett also vote to reverse, based on the fact that Congress didn’t authorize any of this shite, and reverse based on section 5. They don’t make any findings regarding muh Insurrection. And Alito writes their concurring opinion.
Soltamayor and Jackson dissent and write DEI think pieces based on zero law or consistent logic holding that Orange Man Bad.
Roberts writes a majority opinion where he crafts a very narrow reversal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision on entirely esoteric procedural grounds that raises more questions and confusion than it answers. Kav and maybe Kagan support it. He doesn’t touch the merits. He doesn’t discuss that the Colorado communists read out section 5 of the 14th A.
Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett also vote to reverse, based on the fact that Congress didn’t authorize any of this shite, and reverse based on section 5. They don’t make any findings regarding muh Insurrection. And Alito writes their concurring opinion.
Soltamayor and Jackson dissent and write DEI think pieces based on zero law or consistent logic holding that Orange Man Bad.
This post was edited on 1/7/24 at 8:53 am
29
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:54 am to Wednesday
The President isn't going to qualify for section 3 of the 14A as he's not an "officer".
There will be 5 opinions, minimum, with at least 3 coming from the majority.
There will be 5 opinions, minimum, with at least 3 coming from the majority.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:55 am to Wednesday
dont even want to guess on this b/c if SCOTUS does the right thing, the enemy already has a backup plan.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:56 am to SlowFlowPro
Agree.
They aren’t going there. Roberts is the biggest coward in American Government
They aren’t going there. Roberts is the biggest coward in American Government
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:57 am to Wednesday
quote:
My prediction:
I think you may have nailed this one.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 8:57 am to Wednesday
quote:
They aren’t going there. Roberts is the biggest coward in American Government
What does cowardice have to do with anything?
If the President doesn't qualify, that ends the controversy. Everything else is moot and it would be improper to opine further (as it would create the very confusion you seem to worry about).
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:01 am to Wednesday
They will soundly reject it. 9-0 or 8-1 with Soto being the lone dissenter.
It won’t be close. It’s patently absurd on its face.
It won’t be close. It’s patently absurd on its face.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:04 am to Wednesday
9-0 or 8-1 to reverse.
Multiple opinions on basis of reversal.
Multiple opinions on basis of reversal.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:05 am to Wednesday
Sane common sense suggests it gets blown out.
But current day being what it is...
But current day being what it is...
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:05 am to Fun Bunch
Soto being the lone dissenter.
Did you forget about the gal who has troubles associating vaginas with women?
Did you forget about the gal who has troubles associating vaginas with women?
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:07 am to Fun Bunch
It will be a 9-0 smackdown reversal of this idiotic, political decision. The reason is that no one has been charged with the crime they are accusing him of; like no other participants now in jail for those actions from Jan 6, that they are accusing Trump of committing. I guess he acted alone, lol. Secondly, the 14th Amendment clause is only enforceable by Congress, not a State Judiciary. It’s clearly unconstitutional…
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:08 am to Wednesday
I can get on board with all of your op.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:21 am to udtiger
quote:
9-0 or 8-1 to reverse.
Multiple opinions on basis of reversal.
Agreed there will be multiple opinions but there’s no way Affirmative Action Jackson or the Wise Latina vote to reverse. I hope I’m wrong, but to date I’ve seen neither of these people apply the law as written. Instead, they focus on signing unreadable WAPO editorials drafted by their law clerks dressed up as a legal opinion.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:24 am to Wednesday
quote:
Roberts writes a majority opinion where he crafts a very narrow reversal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision on entirely esoteric procedural grounds that raises more questions and confusion than it answers. Kav and maybe Kagan support it. He doesn’t touch the merits. He doesn’t discuss that the Colorado communists read out section 5 of the 14th A.
Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett also vote to reverse, based on the fact that Congress didn’t authorize any of this shite, and reverse based on section 5. They don’t make any findings regarding muh Insurrection. And Alito writes their concurring opinion.
Soltamayor and Jackson dissent and write DEI think pieces based on zero law or consistent logic holding that Orange Man Bad.
I think that's so close to the eventuality that you should snag some Powerball tickets while you're on such a roll.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:26 am to ZenitSP97
quote:
half the Supreme Court is made up of pedophiles
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:28 am to Wednesday
I’m in the 9-0 reversal court.
Not on principle, but the USSC does not want the smoke that comes with barring political candidates from running for office.
Not on principle, but the USSC does not want the smoke that comes with barring political candidates from running for office.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:31 am to fjlee90
I think the new dem will be difficult and show her activist ways. Outside of her I think most will understand it’s not legal and an election is coming.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:32 am to Wednesday
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:33 am to fjlee90
I think it's 7-2 just so that the 2 dissenters can write their opinion. I'm guessing Sontamayor and KBJ.
This is a fresh Constitutional issue with no real precedents. These scholarly opportunities are rare and many Justices go their whole career on the USSC (which can be decades) without this opportunity.
This is a fresh Constitutional issue with no real precedents. These scholarly opportunities are rare and many Justices go their whole career on the USSC (which can be decades) without this opportunity.
Posted on 1/7/24 at 9:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:so time to establish the dissenters their own marxist center
This is a fresh Constitutional issue with no real precedents. These scholarly opportunities are rare and many Justices go their whole career on the USSC (which can be decades) without this opportunity.
not to mention complete lack of merit
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News