Wyantry wrote:
“In a stunning decision, the Colorado Supreme Cour... (
show quote)
No surprises here. Colorado is a firmly blue state.
FrumCA wrote:
No surprises here. Colorado is a firmly blue state.
All of the members of the Colorado Supreme Court were appointed by Democrat governors. But the decision was a narrow 4-3 decision.
It would be significant if the decision had a more substantial majority.
The dissent addresses an obvious issue with the process of the original finding, as it did not satisfy the timeline requirements of the election law. This may be the easy hook that SCOTUS will use to override the decision; the original decision did not follow the legal requirements laid out by the applicable election law. Easy peasy, no need to get into the questions raised by the application of 14th Amendment (how to prove insurrection or does it apply to the Presidency). Unless SCOTUS wants to get into the weeds on how to apply the 14th Amendment, a procedural vote is the most likely result.
FrumCA wrote:
No surprises here. Colorado is a firmly blue state.
And SCOTUS is a firmly red state.
dlwhawaii wrote:
And SCOTUS is a firmly red state.
Actually it's evenly divided; four conservatives and four liberals. That is hardly
firmly red.
The Chief Justice can't seem to make up his mind if he's a conservative or liberal.
FrumCA wrote:
Actually it's evenly divided; four conservatives and four liberals. That is hardly firmly red.
The Chief Justice can't seem to make up his mind if he's a conservative or liberal.
CO ruling used Gorsuch's deliberations in their findings; he may be boxed in.
DennyT
Loc: Central Missouri woods
FrumCA wrote:
Actually it's evenly divided; four conservatives and four liberals. That is hardly firmly red.
The Chief Justice can't seem to make up his mind if he's a conservative or liberal.
He is a judge why do people pin labels so easily
DennyT
Loc: Central Missouri woods
jcboy3 wrote:
All of the members of the Colorado Supreme Court were appointed by Democrat governors. But the decision was a narrow 4-3 decision.
It would be significant if the decision had a more substantial majority.
The dissent addresses an obvious issue with the process of the original finding, as it did not satisfy the timeline requirements of the election law. This may be the easy hook that SCOTUS will use to override the decision; the original decision did not follow the legal requirements laid out by the applicable election law. Easy peasy, no need to get into the questions raised by the application of 14th Amendment (how to prove insurrection or does it apply to the Presidency). Unless SCOTUS wants to get into the weeds on how to apply the 14th Amendment, a procedural vote is the most likely result.
All of the members of the Colorado Supreme Court w... (
show quote)
Where is there in 14 a trial requirement .The adjudication requirement is 2/3 of congress.
And election is in my opinion not applicable as the election was long over- along with all avenues of appeal
DennyT wrote:
Where is there in 14 a trial requirement .The adjudication requirement is 2/3 of congress.
And election is in my opinion not applicable as the election was long over- along with all avenues of appeal
The election law I refer to is the Colorado statute that defines a process for disqualifying candidates.
The adjudication requirement in 14 pertains to overriding the disqualification.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.