Wednesday or other SCOTUS experts, is this a trap?

State issue to vote not one to block voting rights

With this sort of nefarious, insane ruling from the Democrats, what's to stop States from putting some REALLY restrictive rights on candidates and who can actually vote?

Democrats are fking Nazis.

I can certainly see them baiting republicans into removing Biden as retaliation and then going full lawfare against anyone who was involved, much like Jan 6. The media will forget who did it initially and republicans will be painted as anti-democracy.

quote:

---

This is not about the mechanisms of the voting process, but candidate qualifications. In that regard, federal elections are federal.

---

Exactly. Each state can’t have its own candidate qualification criteria.

Otherwise you’d never get a candidate to appear on all 50 ballots.

That’s why this is doomed at SCOTUS.

What will be great will be the epic bitch-slapping in their opinion.

Can’t wait to read it and the ensuing melts from progs and demands to pack the court.

It’s more of a substantive due process issue than it is a state election issue.

There are a few issues here. Substantive due process is the most significant one imo.

I’ve been intrigued just thinking about the brief tonight.

quote:

---

Elections are state issues. If SCOTUS reverses this will it give precedent for elections to be federal?

---

So you slept thru the 2000 election?

The Supremes took over the state of Flas procedure to select their own electors. The decision to overturn CO would be far less intrusive than 2000

USSC already ruled Cali can’t deny ballot by requesting tax returns…..

quote:

---

If someone qualifies they should be able to run. This is a slippery slope.

---

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.

How can a state court determine a federal criminal insurrection statute using the state civil laws for burden of proof?