re: Wednesday or other SCOTUS experts, is this a trap?

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

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

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.

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.

Yes, candidate qualification to hold the office of President is federal.The states must apply the requirements when putting names on the ballot.

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?

To her defense, Sid just completed incredible work for Gen Flynn, then immediately flushed a great career down the toilet. It makes no sense.

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?

quote:

---

then immediately flushed a great career down the toilet

---

What an incredible point we've reached when client advocacy is politically criminalized, and considered flushing a legal career down the toilet.