9-0 Decision Reinstating Trump to State Ballots. I assume that the conservative Justices held guns to the liberal Justices heads...... Those who thought that Colorado would prevail are...

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I assume that the conservative Justices held guns to the liberal Justices heads...... Those who thought that Colorado would prevail are just nuts.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24454956-read-the-supreme-courts-order-keeping-donald-trump-on-colorado-ballot

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Blurryeyed wrote:

I assume that the conservative Justices held guns to the liberal Justices heads...... Those who thought that Colorado would prevail are just nuts.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24454956-read-the-supreme-courts-order-keeping-donald-trump-on-colorado-ballot

Cop out . This way they did not rule on insurrection nor did they rule out future actions against trump by federal government agencies.

Same thing they did on remain in Mexico ruling .

But that’s the way it is .

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

DennyT wrote:

Cop out . This way they did not rule on insurrection nor did they rule out future actions against trump by federal government agencies.

Same thing they did on remain in Mexico ruling .

But that’s the way it is .

Holy F Denny, there was no cop out, WTF is the matter with you, do you not see the destruction to our constitution and our institutions that you folks are doing. How can you convict Trump of insurrection without a trial where he actually is able to present a defense? How is it that you can support the political motivations involved in particular states and courts removing a presidential candidate from a ballot based on "we think you are guilty" without due process?

I predicted this outcome when the case was initially announced, clearly I suggested it would be 8-1 or 9-0, and asked if any of you liberals would give us a "Mia culpa".

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

Blurryeyed wrote:

Holy F Denny, there was no cop out, WTF is the mat... (show quote)

All I am saying is the court left that road open for trump insurrection trial.

Interestingly they made it clear that it was congress responsibility for a trial not theirs.

What happens if individual states have their own distinct laws governing trump behavior ?

The court did not rule on trump and insurrection. They said states can not enforce federal law.
Thinking more on this that kinda shots the shit out of abbots claim he is doing federal govt job at border doesn’t it?

Wonder what would happen if democrats win control of house and senate , new congress happens 3weeks befits inauguration.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

DennyT wrote:

All I am saying is the court left that road open f... (show quote)

State laws cannot usurp Federal laws or the Constitution.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

letmedance wrote:

State laws cannot usurp Federal laws or the Constitution.

That kinda make sense but if a state had a specific law of their unique own law that would not be usurping federal.
They certainly could not affect the general election but these are state primaries.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I don't think the conservatives had to hold a gun to anybody's head on this one, Blurry. The liberal justices were leery of this from the beginning. Just because some group thinks Trump is guilty of insurrection is an insufficient standard, even for a liberal judge of stature, hence the 9-0.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

SteveR wrote:

I don't think the conservatives had to hold a gun to anybody's head on this one, Blurry. The liberal justices were leery of this from the beginning. Just because some group thinks Trump is guilty of insurrection is an insufficient standard, even for a liberal judge of stature, hence the 9-0.

This was a given from the start, a 9-0 decision is blasting the media claims that the decision would be based on politics as SCOTUS is 5-4 conservative. In Russia, China, and North Korea, political opponents often disappear from the face of the earth by violent means, it seems the radicals on either side wish they had that option but are only left with the courts to preform their dirty deeds.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

DennyT wrote:

All I am saying is the court left that road open f... (show quote)

I think that what they said was that it is within congressional purview and not the state's purview. They suggested more definitive legislation coming from congress to handle the issue, but they were not talking about Trump, they were talking about removing a presidential candidate from ballots.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

SteveR wrote:

I don't think the conservatives had to hold a gun to anybody's head on this one, Blurry. The liberal justices were leery of this from the beginning. Just because some group thinks Trump is guilty of insurrection is an insufficient standard, even for a liberal judge of stature, hence the 9-0.

MY OP was loaded with sarcasm

Vladimir200 Loc: Beaumont, Ca.

SteveR wrote:

I don't think the conservatives had to hold a gun to anybody's head on this one, Blurry. The liberal justices were leery of this from the beginning. Just because some group thinks Trump is guilty of insurrection is an insufficient standard, even for a liberal judge of stature, hence the 9-0.

As much as I hate Trump and all he stands for, I'm thinking this was probably a good decision. We don't want, in the future, a state coming up with a really stupid reason using the 14th Amendment...........to block a candidate from running. Look how the Republicans recently impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas with no significant proof. This is scarry behavior. Wow, wouldn't it be great if Congress could just do their job. Whew, wishful thinking.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Vladimir200 wrote:

As much as I hate Trump and all he stands for, I'm thinking this was probably a good decision. We don't want, in the future, a state coming up with a really stupid reason using the 14th Amendment...........to block a candidate from running. Look how the Republicans recently impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas with no significant proof. This is scarry behavior. Wow, wouldn't it be great if Congress could just do their job. Whew, wishful thinking.

LOL.... The border crisis is all the proof you need. And the two impeachments of Trump?

pdsdville Loc: Midlothian, Tx

I voted for this clown twice. Never again. There is no limit to what fear and money can accomplish. I fear we are about to elect our first dictator much as the Germans elected Hitler.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

pdsdville wrote:

I voted for this clown twice. Never again. There is no limit to what fear and money can accomplish. I fear we are about to elect our first dictator much as the Germans elected Hitler.

Glad to see another with some common sense.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

pdsdville wrote:

I voted for this clown twice. Never again. There is no limit to what fear and money can accomplish. I fear we are about to elect our first dictator much as the Germans elected Hitler.

We have a constitution, a military, FBI, Secret Service, US Marshalls Service, and a myriad of armed Executive agencies to protect us from what you fear...... Never going to happen.