The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: CC27 on March 04, 2024, 09:28:47 AM
-
In It to Win It (8,040 posts)
SCOTUS reverses the Colorado Supreme Court, keeping Trump on the ballot
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf
Scrivener7 (50,445 posts)
1. Shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
But I would like to cry.
NYC Liberal (20,118 posts)
8. Section 3 is not very well written.
They should have specified exactly how it would be determined that someone is determined to be disqualified.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218742122
Lots of fighting on this one...
-
Thread discipline, keeping posts related to a topic in a single thread to reduce duplication and confusion is a foreign concept on DU. Sometimes I think their thread proliferation is an ego thing, DU-Member ______ wants to have their own thread about ________.
-
(https://i.etsystatic.com/26400387/r/il/3e64b1/2974399381/il_1588xN.2974399381_ddcu.jpg)
-
It says anyone who engages and insurrection or rebellion is disqualified but that Congress can remove the disability.
What they don’t understand is that Trump has never been accused of or convicted of insurrection it’s all in their mind :thatsright: :loser:
-
NYC Liberal (20,118 posts)
8. Section 3 is not very well written.
They should have specified exactly how it would be determined that someone is determined to be disqualified.
That's in Section 5:
"The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
That's why a state can't enforce it and why SCOTUS ruled 9-0 that CO SC can pound sand.
-
NYC Liberal (20,118 posts)
8. Section 3 is not very well written.
They should have specified exactly how it would be determined that someone is determined to be disqualified.
DUmmies reading of Section 3.
Traffic court judges in Chicago shall be the sole determiner of who can and cannot be on the Presidential ballot.
-
It says anyone who engages and insurrection or rebellion is disqualified but that Congress can remove the disability.
What they don’t understand is that Trump has never been accused of or convicted of insurrection it’s all in their mind :thatsright: :loser:
Actually, wasn't the whole point of Pee-lousy's Chimpeachment Part Deux; leading/orchestrating the Jan. 6th "insurrection"? In that event, wouldn't the Senate's failure to convict The Donald of offending Pee-lousy's delicate sensibilities be the part that throws the wrench into the DNC's works?
I would think that acquittal also affects Jack Smith's witch hunt as well...
-
They should have specified exactly how it would be determined that someone is determined to be disqualified.
How about being guilty of and convicted of a real crime? Not just figment of your imagination.