Is Trump constitutionally barred from being POTUS again?

[newyorkvol]

Key to the issue of Trump standing for election and appearing on ballots is the interpretation of the amendment. The third clause doesn’t require conviction by court or Congress. Appeal of the Colorado ruling to the Supreme Court of the United States is inevitable.

Agree with wording not requiring conviction by court or Congress. So, back to the earlier conversation….who actually gets to make this determination? Currently, it appears that one side of the political aisle has declared “insurrection” and therefore able to invoke the 14th. It seems like a slippery slope if it only requires one’s political opponents to declare insurrection rebellion or comfort or aid.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

The calls to election officials are in poor taste but nothing illegal. The fake electors on the other hand are an issue if and I stress if the letters explaining don't include that the alternative electors were submitted in case the court cases rules in thier favor. If they dont they those that can be directly linked should be charged.

Urging the officials to "find" votes is more than poor taste.

 

[whodeycin85]

Agree with wording not requiring conviction by court or Congress. So, back to the earlier conversation….who actually gets to make this determination? Currently, it appears that one side of the political aisle has declared “insurrection” and therefore able to invoke the 14th. It seems like a slippery slope if it only requires one’s political opponents to declare insurrection rebellion or comfort or aid.

This is indeed the issue...I believe that is why the 5th amendment is needed. Without due process and subsequent conviction this measure falls flat as it has in other states.

 

[Sandman 423]

Urging the officials to "find" votes is more than poor taste.

When you put quotes around find does it become create?

 

[whodeycin85]

Urging the officials to "find" votes is more than poor taste.

When you consider the issues GA had and the court cases still on going...self admitted chain of custody issues which should have invalidated those votes if they followed their own laws. Calling the foe the "finding" of votes was justified when viewed as find the fraud..which we are see plenty of smoke, even more now..I mean FFS the tabulation fraud is on the next meeting to be sent to the AG...corruption abound and it will prob not go any where but the fact it's being referred if enough to validate that call

 

[0nelilreb]

As a let’s watch the whole thing melt down person , im all for individual states being able to determine who is worthy based on their subjective opinions to be on their ballots running for POTUS and who can’t . Im positive it will turn out to be just fine .

 

[Sandman 423]

As a let’s watch the whole thing melt down person , im all for individual states being able to determine who is worthy based on their subjective opinions to be on their ballots running for POTUS and who can’t . Im positive it will turn out to be just fine .

The left isn't going to disagree until a right leaning state like Georgia excludes Biden. Their supreme court judges are selected by the governor.
In today's climate it isn't to far fetched for some to conclude that taking money from our adversaries amounts to treason.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

When you consider the issues GA had and the court cases still on going...self admitted chain of custody issues which should have invalidated those votes if they followed their own laws. Calling the foe the "finding" of votes was justified when viewed as find the fraud..which we are see plenty of smoke, even more now..I mean FFS the tabulation fraud is on the next meeting to be sent to the AG...corruption abound and it will prob not go any where but the fact it's being referred if enough to validate that call

There is nothing coming out of Georgia that would effect election results. Trump and his followers have filed dozens of lawsuits each has met the same fate. We've wasted millions and millions of dollars recounting and validating votes that when recounted always seem to widen the gap.

There are still dummies on this board that are convinced Cyber Ninjas is going to release the damning report any day now and proclaim Trump the winner in Arizona.

 

[whodeycin85]

There is nothing coming out of Georgia that would effect election results. Trump and his followers have filed dozens of lawsuits each has met the same fate. We've wasted millions and millions of dollars recounting and validating votes that when recounted always seem to widen the gap.

Nothing now..no then. Absolutely it would have changed the results. Consider that without Trumps name attached these lawsuits are now being heard in court.

 

[hog88]

Agree with wording not requiring conviction by court or Congress. So, back to the earlier conversation….who actually gets to make this determination? Currently, it appears that one side of the political aisle has declared “insurrection” and therefore able to invoke the 14th. It seems like a slippery slope if it only requires one’s political opponents to declare insurrection rebellion or comfort or aid.

The esteemed justices of the CO Supreme Court made that determination for CO. Their decision should be respected.

 

[newyorkvol]

The esteemed justices of the CO Supreme Court made that determination for CO. Their decision should be respected.

Not arguing that. I just think it’s a pretty slippery slope and will just lead to more retaliatory political games. But that may be the only solution for our current political woes.

 

[hog88]

Not arguing that. I just think it’s a pretty slippery slope and will just lead to more retaliatory political games. But that may be the only solution for our current political woes.

This ruling will undoubtedly lead to retaliatory actions by other states.

 

[Sudden Impact]

Not arguing that. I just think it’s a pretty slippery slope and will just lead to more retaliatory political games. But that may be the only solution for our current political woes.

You are 100% correct. Impeachment is an example. Waiting for the moment the Democrat's focus on the Trump family with legal prosecutions.

 

[evillawyer]

He hasn’t been charged or convicted.

And where do you see that as a requirement?

There's actually a good podcast where Baude -- the author of the law review article that made this argument -- goes through each objection. I'll link it if I can find it.

 

[evillawyer]

For those interested in the podcast with Baude:

Prof. Will Baude on Section 3, Insurrection, and Trump - The Dispatch Prof. Will Baude on Section 3, Insurrection, and Trump

 

[newyorkvol]

Just saw on X interesting quote from George Washington farewell address in 1796….

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”

 

[evillawyer]

 

[Tin Man]

Note that Colorado has a state law predicated on the 14th amendment. The SCOC’s decision is to the applicability of that law in precluding Trump from appearing on the ballot in Colorado.

Will the SCOTUS agree to hear an appeal of the Colorado court decision? On what grounds? And if so, will they decide that it is a state matter in which the Federal judiciary has no part?

 

[hog88]

Note that Colorado has a state law predicated on the 14th amendment. The SCOC’s decision is to the applicability of that law in precluding Trump from appearing on the ballot in Colorado.

Will the SCOTUS agree to hear an appeal of the Colorado court decision? On what grounds? And if so, will they decide that it is a state matter in which the Federal judiciary has no part?

That is exactly what they should decide IMO.

 

[whodeycin85]

Note that Colorado has a state law predicated on the 14th amendment. The SCOC’s decision is to the applicability of that law in precluding Trump from appearing on the ballot in Colorado.

Will the SCOTUS agree to hear an appeal of the Colorado court decision? On what grounds? And if so, will they decide that it is a state matter in which the Federal judiciary has no part?

Good question...
I'm curious and not sure of I'll word third correctly ot not but I wonder if early amendments hold more "authority" (might be wrong expression) over those added later...

 

[whodeycin85]

That is exactly what they should decide IMO.

In a Federal election?? In a state election, I agree.

 

[davethevol]

That is exactly what they should decide IMO.

That would cause a huge cluster. I don’t see how that would get resolved because it would pit states against each other and possibly further delegitimize federal elections. Either way though, this country is headed for conflict.

 

[Tin Man]

Eventually, if the SCOTUS decides to let Colorado be, what are the implications for the other states’ court decisions?

A similar case in Michigan has yet to make it to the SCOM. The appellate court opinion is that Trump’s eligibility to hold office has no bearing on the Michigan Republican Party’s desire to place him on their primary ballot.

The Minnesota high court dismissed a lawsuit on these grounds, ruling that the Republican primary is an internal party matter, and Trump’s appearance on their primary ballot has no bearing on his eligibility for the general election.

 

[hog88]

In a Federal election?? In a state election, I agree.

In reality there is no such thing as a "federal election". I guess since the abomination called the 17th amendment was enacted the closest thing we have to a "federal election" is senatorial elections.

 

[whodeycin85]

In reality there is no such thing as a "federal election". I guess since the abomination called the 17th amendment was enacted the closest thing we have to a "federal election" is senatorial elections.

Do you think some amendments override others??