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

Recommendations

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

neener, neener, Stinky Donny rurallib Dec 2023 #1
213 pages! This will take a while. Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2023 #2
SCOTUS is gonna have to deal with this Maeve Dec 2023 #3
The real kicker comes on page 9 Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2023 #4
Finally. Voltaire2 Dec 2023 #5
Can he run as an Independent in the Gerneral election? OAITW r.2.0 Dec 2023 #6
From my understanding he is disqualified from holding office MichMan Dec 2023 #8
Agreed, like voting for Daffy Duck shelshaw Dec 2023 #18
Opinion specifically and explicitly states that write-in votes cannot count Prairie Gates Dec 2023 #23
Well, That's The Thing... GB_RN Dec 2023 #33
My laptop DU tells me nothing on your post count. OAITW r.2.0 Dec 2023 #41
Thanks. GB_RN Dec 2023 #56
Nowhere in the Amendment is conviction mentioned. The key word is "engaged" Cattledog Dec 2023 #50
"engaged in insurrection" Novara Dec 2023 #52
And also . . . DC77 Dec 2023 #58
You Have A Point. GB_RN Dec 2023 #65
Good news! Marthe48 Dec 2023 #7
I am not confident that the SC will agree with the Colorado SC. They will argue that he hasn't been charged with JohnSJ Dec 2023 #9
I am curious to see how they will twist things, given that states run elections. Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2023 #10
and I think the conservatives on the court will do a lot of twisting JohnSJ Dec 2023 #16
Realistic assessment. n/t shrike3 Dec 2023 #12
Neither charged nor convicted Fiendish Thingy Dec 2023 #20
Laurence Tribe says it doesn't matter MichMan Dec 2023 #24
Tribe isn't a SC Justice. Fiendish Thingy Dec 2023 #27
If it was for insurrection, then yes they could MichMan Dec 2023 #40
Judge Luttig also agrees with Tribe. nt Trueblue Texan Dec 2023 #57
Nobody involved in the suit and none of the judges thought of this Prairie Gates Dec 2023 #28
I'm hardly the first to raise the issue Fiendish Thingy Dec 2023 #32
And how do the litigants and the opinion(s) address this concern? Prairie Gates Dec 2023 #34
What concern? Fiendish Thingy Dec 2023 #36
Has it ever come up from the litigants that there's been no charge and conviction Prairie Gates Dec 2023 #37
It will be brought up on appeal. Nt. Fiendish Thingy Dec 2023 #38
Surely it has come up in the actual litigation Prairie Gates Dec 2023 #39
Then SCOTUS has to way in. Was it an Insurrection or not? OAITW r.2.0 Dec 2023 #42
I think they'll rule that insurrection isn't a wink wink Polybius Dec 2023 #44
It was an Insurrection. And I would like SCOTUS to validate this simple fact. OAITW r.2.0 Dec 2023 #45
Just because we "think" it is doesn't mean that that's enough evidence Polybius Dec 2023 #46
It is not required that he be charged or convicted NJCher Dec 2023 #47
THANK YOU Novara Dec 2023 #53
Suck it Donny, you fat piece of shit Blue Owl Dec 2023 #11
This is a big deal. Now there is a precedence other courts can cite. flashman13 Dec 2023 #13
That's what I was thinking, and I hope other states will use... SKKY Dec 2023 #30
Michigan's case is going to the MI supreme court Novara Dec 2023 #54
Yay!! ificandream Dec 2023 #14
Interesting to see just how Roberts can twist this Scalded Nun Dec 2023 #15
Roberts wouldn't be the problem TwilightZone Dec 2023 #17
I Don't Think This Comes To A State Issue... GB_RN Dec 2023 #35
Kick dalton99a Dec 2023 #19
This message was self-deleted by its author Omaha Steve Dec 2023 #21
May other states quickly follow suit. Evolve Dammit Dec 2023 #22
I guess I don't have much of an imagination... dchill Dec 2023 #25
I'm delighted that this happened in Colorado FakeNoose Dec 2023 #26
Doubt that would stop him even if it were true... but it isn't FBaggins Dec 2023 #49
SCOTUS will find this easy to dispose of. Frasier Balzov Dec 2023 #29
All of your points are well covered in the decision. See the pdf linked in OP. Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2023 #48
Suck it Donny you fucking piece of shit Hitler wannabe Blue Owl Dec 2023 #31
Unfortunately the wording allows SCOTUS an out jgmiller Dec 2023 #43
What about write ins? The Grand Illuminist Dec 2023 #51
Those votes will be discarded MichMan Dec 2023 #60
Then the COSC blundered. The Grand Illuminist Dec 2023 #61
It is consistent with their decision that he is disqualified from holding office MichMan Dec 2023 #62
They will look at the write in ban as voter suppression The Grand Illuminist Dec 2023 #63
In my state, write in votes are only counted when candidate petitions the state to be officially approved as a write in MichMan Dec 2023 #64
I don't get all this pause ruling to allow appeal. A ruling is a ruling. It should be in effect immediately. bullimiami Dec 2023 #55
I think SCOTUS will disqualify him from Colorado but not make it a national ruling. ificandream Dec 2023 #59
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Colorado Supreme Court di...»Reply #11