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

Caliman73

(11,767 posts)
2. I am not sure that is correct.
Fri Feb 9, 2024, 12:04 PM
Feb 2024

They seem to have a way out and showed that in some of their questioning and argumentation. They are saying that while the States administer elections, that because this is about a Federal Election, the States do not have jurisdiction to decide unilaterally that anyone can be disqualified. Since no Federal court has adjudicated that Trump engaged in insurrection, the State Courts cannot simply assert it and take him off.

I don't necessarily agree with that, but it is actually a relatively clever way to avoid some of the problems with it. Obviously Trump is going to lie that he was "COMPLETELY EXONERATED" but that is expected. It will be a narrow, thread the needle decision.

I would actually rather see Trump on the ballot. As his other cases heat up and he gets closer to getting convicted, people will be paying attention and will move away from him. President Biden will win bigger than last time and Trump will be humiliated. He won't have this issue to whine about, though we know he will whine about everything anyway.

Recommendations

7 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Billionaire class of sickos! Brainfodder Feb 2024 #1
I am not sure that is correct. Caliman73 Feb 2024 #2
There were plenty of judges that charged the insurrectionists Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #4
True. Caliman73 Feb 2024 #11
It does not say trump has to be charged or convicted of insurrection. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #12
It actually does FBaggins Feb 2024 #27
Well...then do the other required qualifications Farmer-Rick Feb 2024 #35
Totally specious reasoning. NoRethugFriends Feb 2024 #7
No they are not. SCOTUS isn't making the decision... Caliman73 Feb 2024 #13
You get it. Fiendish Thingy Feb 2024 #9
Am curious whether there will be inconsistencies addressing the border issue. limbicnuminousity Feb 2024 #14
That has been a problem historically. Caliman73 Feb 2024 #17
Your assessment is astute. limbicnuminousity Feb 2024 #44
Border issues are complex. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #49
The orginal insurrectionists did not face court trials. GreenWave Feb 2024 #21
Original as in Civil War original? Caliman73 Feb 2024 #23
Agreed and I did mean the Civil war traitors. GreenWave Feb 2024 #37
Except they weren't barred from *running* for the office FBaggins Feb 2024 #46
Or it could be used to keep anybody they feel like jimfields33 Feb 2024 #3
You need proof of an insurrection, we have almost 24 hrs of documentation he created one. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #5
No it couldn't NoRethugFriends Feb 2024 #6
The SC found nothing wrong with the Colorado decision? FBaggins Feb 2024 #47
In Colorado, there was a trial and appeal HariSeldon Feb 2024 #24
Their ruling, likely unanimous, will be more nuanced Fiendish Thingy Feb 2024 #8
Well the textualists will be legislating from the bench again. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #10
It seems like SCOTUS's lame excuse is that they don't want some states using the 14th Amendment, sec. 3, to LaMouffette Feb 2024 #15
SCOTUS decisions are made when cases are brought to them. Caliman73 Feb 2024 #19
Thanks for clearing that up for me, Caliman73! I feel at this point that every American is an injured party from the LaMouffette Feb 2024 #50
Tell all the states that Trump carried out an insurrection and can't be on ANY ballots??? Polybius Feb 2024 #30
Federal and State judges convicted or kicked off people on ballots for insurrection Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #36
In Trump's Colorado case, it was the state SC upholding it Polybius Feb 2024 #42
Overly dramatic, IMHO RussBLib Feb 2024 #16
It's not about our ability to beat him at the ballot box Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #18
If they were a convicted traitor, no RussBLib Feb 2024 #20
Impeachment is removal from office, he is not in office. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #38
The SC is bought and paid for. rubbersole Feb 2024 #22
I hope you are right. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #39
I put this squarely on McConnell relayerbob Feb 2024 #25
If the SCOTUS votes to keep TFG on the ballot... William Seger Feb 2024 #26
My (barely informed) opinion is they will keep him on the ballot and not by a 6-3 decision. Perhaps kelly1mm Feb 2024 #28
Or maybe they are right if it's 9-0 Polybius Feb 2024 #29
IMO it was pretty obvious from their questions that they were looking for a way... brush Feb 2024 #31
Yes, if they rule to keep him on, it's another nail in the coffin of our Democracy. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #40
I am curious how the liberal Justices vote on this. William769 Feb 2024 #32
I listened to the entire hearing. It sounds like Trump will be on the ballot. Vote. Joinfortmill Feb 2024 #33
Every vote, every election is the vote of a lifetime. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #41
Not if, it is when they do. Bev54 Feb 2024 #34
Wondering if all this could have been avoided if Garland Emile Feb 2024 #43
No need to wonder, he didn't and now were here. Bluethroughu Feb 2024 #45
Considering political concerns... Think. Again. Feb 2024 #51
Yes FBaggins Feb 2024 #48
I agree but politically it's bad ebbie15644 Feb 2024 #52
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If the SCOTUS votes to ke...»Reply #2