Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

question everything

(48,797 posts)
Thu Nov 2, 2023, 09:09 AM Nov 2023

MN Supreme Court to decide today whether Whiny should be off the ballot

because of the 14th Amendment.

Professor Schultz commented that if this will pass, another state court may decide that Biden did something that could keep him..

I think, no legal knowledge, that Whiny has to be convicted first..

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MN Supreme Court to decide today whether Whiny should be off the ballot (Original Post) question everything Nov 2023 OP
Oral argument today - not the decision. But it will be livestreamed here: Ocelot II Nov 2023 #1
Thank you for the link! 2naSalit Nov 2023 #2
in case anyone wants more info on NJCher Nov 2023 #3
Couy 'Cowboys for Trump' can't run for any office duhneece Nov 2023 #4
When the insurrectionist barrier was applied post-Civil War bucolic_frolic Nov 2023 #5
It's on youtube NJCher Nov 2023 #6

Ocelot II

(120,819 posts)
1. Oral argument today - not the decision. But it will be livestreamed here:
Thu Nov 2, 2023, 09:14 AM
Nov 2023
https://www.mncourts.gov/SupremeCourt.aspx

According to the analysis of Laurence Tribe and Judge Luttig, he doesn't have to be convicted first because the 14th Amendment is self-executing - that is, there is no precondition other than committing insurrection, not necessarily being convicted of it. Since the Insurrection Act was passed before the 14th Amendment, they could have made conviction under the act a prerequisite, but they didn't.

NJCher

(37,865 posts)
3. in case anyone wants more info on
Thu Nov 2, 2023, 09:26 AM
Nov 2023

what Ocelot says in her post, you can listen to some of Preet Bahara and Joyce Vance on Cafe Insider's "Trick or Trump." I listened yesterday and found it very interesting.

Thanks for the link, Ocelot. Will be listening.

bucolic_frolic

(46,973 posts)
5. When the insurrectionist barrier was applied post-Civil War
Thu Nov 2, 2023, 09:55 AM
Nov 2023

Confederates were excluded wholesale, no convictions required. They had rebelled against the U.S.A.

The U.S. Army was the force in possession of the administrative and often legal apparatus of the South. It was run by General Grant in Washington. He appointed Army personnel as agents. They usually made decisions. No SCOTUS or courts involved. Like most officials in Louisiana were tossed from office. This loosely from the book, newly released, "Klan War" by Fergus M. Bordewich.

Where that leaves us today is anyone's guess. Will SCOTUS conservatives refuse to see what they saw on Jan 6th? If his underlings were doing political things outside their official duties to overturn the election results, and that is what they've been charged with, some of them, or did they already cop that plea?, then Whiny is along for the ride. It's as good as insurrectionist in my mind.

BTW, WHINY is a great name. Almost like a trademark because it fits so well. Shout it from the rooftops.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Minnesota»MN Supreme Court to decid...