Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from the ballot

The impression that I get is that folks that would really like Trump to be removed from the ballot are mostly Republicans. It makes sense, they would really like to see someone else nominated besides Trump. That way they would probably have a better chance of winning the White House.

 

Especially if they can express outrage at judicial interference with the Will of the People.

 

Of course I'm not claiming that a majority of Republicans feel that way. It's just as a Democrat, Trump worries me but I don't feel that horrible about it because I hope that he loses in the general election. For Republicans that don't like Trump though this is their best hope, the hope that the 14th amendment prevents him from even getting on the ballot.

 

It would allow them to continue as weasles.

 

The leopard cannot change his spots. Nor can the weasel.

 

The stoat DOES change its coat. White in winter, brown in summer. But underneath it's always a weasel.

 

I read an option article on Yahoo.
The Supreme Court Will Most Likely Overrule Colorado's Decision About Trump's Ineligibility

https://www.yahoo.com/news/colorado-may-saved-us-another-163139403.html

Last week, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump is ineligible to become president due to his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection. However, it is most likely that the Supreme Court will overturn their decision.

The ruling, which states his candidacy is prohibited based on constitutional grounds, is the first of its kind. Other states that made similar challenges have been unsuccessful.

 

I think he led an insurrection and attempted to stay in power illegally.

I fully expect the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in his favor.

 

If the SCOTUS ruled Trump ineligible, Trump would encourage rioting and chaotic lawless behavior. However, if Trump is allowed to run and loses the election again, he will continue his election lies and encourage rioting and chaotic lawless behavior. If he is allowed to run and wins the election he will continue his lies and encourage rioting and chaotic lawless behavior. Even worse though, he will also have his hands back on the levers of power and he will use that to destroy our democracy. This is his stated goal that he repeats daily, to lead an administration of "RETRIBUTION". For example, where he will dismantle the DOJ and use it as a personal retribution squad. Another example he will build concentration camps to hold millions of people and split families as he ships millions of people a year out of the country.

I too fully expect the SCOTUS to ignore the constitution and rule in Trump's favor.

 

Well...I kinda think they will let Trump run. In fact I don't see how they can do otherwise...but...how? They can't deny that Trump attempted to overthrow the government by election interference and that the interference turned violent. They could redefine "insurrection" and say this wasn't one but such an opinion would be painfully political and end forever their credibility. Or they could say Trump was entitled to more process but in doing so they'd have to define what process is adequate and that would result in a couple of dozen states doing exactly what they say. Besides, Colorado gave Trump a full bench trial with a burden of clear and convincing. Only thing stricter is reasonable doubt by a jury and there's no authority for that.

I think they will say that the constitution places this issue in Congress's hands and courts cannot adjudicate it. That's totally unworkable in practice but I see no alternative.

 

The argument I liked best that could be used by SCOTUS to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court is that Congress needs to pass a law that removes the confusion and open questions about when that section of the 14th amendment is applicable. At least that is my understanding of the argument put forth in an article that I read. To demonstrate my rather weak understanding of these kind of things I'm thinking that you are saying a very similar thing here.

 

If they toss it to Congress, that won't stop other officials in other states from trying to ban Trump from their ballots. Each case will have to be adjudicated. The assumption is that the state courts will follow precedence, but they might not. This stuff could stay messy for quite some time, yet never seriously threatening to change the outcome.

The people don't need courts to decide on the 14th Amendment, his business fraud, his campaign violations (Stormy), his election interference, his national security breaches, his leading an insurrection, or running a criminal enterprise. They have what they need to make the distinctions they require. They only must do so.

 

Well, the legal problem is that most of the 14th amendment is self executing meaning it's effective whether congress says so or not. This is on purpose. Congress cannot redefine birthright citizenship for example because if they could, the protection would be meaningless. Usually an amendment specifically says that congress may legislate. The insurrection clause for example gives congress the power to lift the bar. It says nothing about needing legislation to make the bar effective. It does give congress the power to enforce the ban but not to decide whether there will be a ban.

 

As a further observation, it's a mistake to just assume the court will do whatever it feels like doing. Lately people have been pointing to the Dobbs majority opinion as an example of legislation from the bench. I find that those who shout the loudest are the least likely to have actually read it. It's nothing of the sort. One may well disagree with it but one cannot say it is an exercise in anything other than careful legal reasoning.

 

Finally, where shall the various Secretaries of State who are responsible for administering elections get their guidance if not from the courts? And if the courts can't adjudicate this claim, how can aggrieved candidates obtain relief? Suppose Alabama decides to bar Biden in the general election. Where does the Biden campaign go to force the Alabama SOS to follow the law?

 

It's a mess but only because Trump did commit insurrection, did attempt to subvert the electoral vote count through violence, and is as a matter of law ineligible to serve but to speak the truth will require courage the Justices don't seem to possess.

 

I see that the Michigan Supreme Court chickened out and said it is up to Congress.

 

If I were to make a purely political decision, as opposed to a legal decision or a good citizen concerned about my country's democracy decision, I would want Donald Trump to be the Republican nominee. Because I think he will be much easier to beat in the general election than Niki Haley. From that perspective there's not much to lose or to gain in this court decision. The folks with the most to lose, in my opinion, are Republicans. MAGA Republicans versus not-Trump Republicans are the groups with the most to lose.

For myself, I'd like to see Trump ruled ineligible to run. Just to keep his as far away from the White House as possible. If Niki Haley, for example, became President I think that our democracy would still be secure. It would be worth it IMHO.

 

No, the folks with the most to lose is America if we ignore Trump's actions following the 2020 election. His behavior cannot be tolerated let alone condoned if our republic is to endure. I cannot understand how people like Senator Graham and Speaker Johnson can actively support a violent fascist movement and its leader and still think of themselves as loyal Americans. They should condemn Trump's efforts to overthrow the constitution in the clearest way possible. They aren't doing that. They should be ashamed.