Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from the ballot

Yeah. Monumental fudgery.

 

I don't think they can sit on their hands, either. Besides, states don't have complete sovereignty, right? The Supremes would have a tough time keeping it out? Everything decided at the state level would be subject to appeal. I guess they could rule and just turn away all challenges.

As a citizen, I don't think issues that affect all Americans should not be left to one state. I think it is the responsibility of the federal government.

 

See, that's just it. Inexplicably the amendment merely states that insurrectionists are barred and that Congress can remove the bar. The text is silent as to how to determine who is an insurrectionist and who makes that determination and how. You'd think, given the thousand or so ex-Confederates who had previously taken an oath to uphold the U.S constitution, that some process would be in place but no.

So I don't really know what the clause means. I can argue from general principals but in a matter of this gravity is that appropriate? I don't know. Some courts and election officials say "yes" and others say "no" for various reasons that are mostly process related. In Virginia, the federal court said the petitioners lacked standing for example. That's not a decision on the merits.

I am reasonably sure that a criminal conviction is not necessary. Criminal judgments can remove life and liberty for extended periods of time. I am inclined to think the Colorado Supreme Court got it right but it's not clear that the state court is the right place to file.

Somehow the U.S. Supreme Court will have to face the issue squarely.

 

Exactly. And I hope they do, no matter what the outcome is.

 

Besides, it's fun to watch them squirm.

 

It's gonna look like an Aunt Annie's stand when they're done with this.

 

If SCOTUS rules against Trump it will probably get messy with riots and/or lone wolf attacks. However, that is probably going to be the case in any scenario with the possible of exception of Trump just passing away peacefully in his sleep.

 

Hopefully, some hero will emerge who can arrange that...

 

LOL

The main point I was trying to make in my post was that trying to worry whether or not a decision might trigger MAGA run riots or lone wolf attacks is probably not going to be productive. Trump is going to trigger MAGA run riots or lone wolf attacks as long as he's around.

 

... Perhaps a pinch of Novichok or Polonium with his bedtime cheeseburger? ... just a thought. Then MAGA would blame the Kremlin and send all their money to Mr. Zelenskiyy, to equip the Ukrainian armed forces. Two problems solved...

 

Oh, no. If Trump suffers a heart attack the fascist media will announce that the circumstances are deeply suspicious and that Crooked Joe must have sent Treasury Agents to assassinate him.

 

"Any Dem will do."- Randy Rainbow

 

Q-anon would say that Trump is really just in hiding and that we should "Trust the Plan". The White Christian Nationalists would say the Liberal Crooks killed Trump but that, being that Trump is the Second Coming, he will rise again and lead us to a Thousand Years of White Supremacy.

 

And his kids would say, "Which golf course should we bury him on?"

 

White males have been Supreme for more than our fair share. I propose that we abdicate our Supreme position to the females and minorities for the next couple of hundred years or so.

(Or maybe it would be easier to go with Steve's suggestion and we just contact the Clinton's and ask them to solve the problem.)

 

No. We should do it for the next two million years, at least. Give it a chance to settle in. I've given up mine, if I ever had it to begin with. Best decision I ever made. What's keeping you, Bill?

 

Tea leaves? The Supreme Court refused to rule immediately on Trump's immunity claim. Had they ruled him immune to prosecution while in office that would have been that. But they didn't. That's interesting because it means that the question of immunity will await direct appeal if he's convicted.

That's not how governmental immunity usually works. The official is immune from prosecution not just conviction and punishment.

 

If SCOTUS thought that there was very little merit to the argument couldn't they just ignore it since the current ruling is that he is not immune to prosecution? If it comes up in appeal and the appeals court rules that he is not immune then they could just ignore it again at that point as well? At least that is my understanding as to how it works.