Colorado case. To keep Trump off ballot

[Anonymous]

I couldn't find another thread about this but it is fascinating. My question is if Colorado case agrees that Trump incited an insurrection and refuse to put his no name on the ballot is this a state's right or is it federal. Where can Trump appeal?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/01/politics/colorado-14th-amendment-trump-day-three-takeaways/index.html

[Anonymous]

Since it hinges on the US Constitution the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter. Whatever they decide will be binding on the other 50 states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since it hinges on the US Constitution the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter. Whatever they decide will be binding on the other 50 states.

I have zero doubt that the "originalists" and "textualists" will find a reason to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment can't possibly really mean what it says.

[Anonymous]

There's basically three defenses for Trump:
1. January 6 wasn't an insurrection.
2. It was, but Trump wasn't a part of it.
3. The 14th Amendment doesn't matter.

#1 is tough because there are people in federal prison right now serving multi-decade sentences for seditious conspiracy.

#2 is going to get really tough once Trump's trial gets underway.

#3 will be where they hang their hats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's basically three defenses for Trump:
1. January 6 wasn't an insurrection.
2. It was, but Trump wasn't a part of it.
3. The 14th Amendment doesn't matter.

#1 is tough because there are people in federal prison right now serving multi-decade sentences for seditious conspiracy.

#2 is going to get really tough once Trump's trial gets underway.

#3 will be where they hang their hats.

Didn't Trump say that he would pardon the "insurrectionists'?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since it hinges on the US Constitution the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter. Whatever they decide will be binding on the other 50 states.

I have zero doubt that the "originalists" and "textualists" will find a reason to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment can't possibly really mean what it says.

Shouldn't the three justices appointed by Trump recuse themselves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since it hinges on the US Constitution the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter. Whatever they decide will be binding on the other 50 states.

I have zero doubt that the "originalists" and "textualists" will find a reason to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment can't possibly really mean what it says.

Shouldn't the three justices appointed by Trump recuse themselves?

It's not a conflict of interest. They are not beholden to him nor have any financial interest in his myriad issues. They are not close friends or family. They are appointed for life and Trump has no power over them. No grounds for recusal.

[Anonymous]

Nothing stops people from writing in his name or any other candidate's name. Doesn't Colorado always vote D?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since it hinges on the US Constitution the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter. Whatever they decide will be binding on the other 50 states.

I have zero doubt that the "originalists" and "textualists" will find a reason to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment can't possibly really mean what it says.

Shouldn't the three justices appointed by Trump recuse themselves?

It's not a conflict of interest. They are not beholden to him nor have any financial interest in his myriad issues. They are not close friends or family. They are appointed for life and Trump has no power over them. No grounds for recusal.

Only if you ignore the specific way that wealthy elite operate. It is an open culture of quid pro quo and favor trading. People aren’t stupid.

[Anonymous]

There’s a minor difference between the definitions for “insurrection” and “sedition.” Does anyone know if there is a legal distinction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I couldn't find another thread about this but it is fascinating. My question is if Colorado case agrees that Trump incited an insurrection and refuse to put his no name on the ballot is this a state's right or is it federal. Where can Trump appeal?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/01/politics/colorado-14th-amendment-trump-day-three-takeaways/index.html

Question? It's totally partisan and they will. Supreme Court will rightfully overturn it but the state of CO will draaaaaagggg it out, hoping they can beat the clock.

[Anonymous]

Seems like someone is smoking too much marijuana out in CO.

Trump must be on the ballot. Or CO will turn into a total $hith*le state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I couldn't find another thread about this but it is fascinating. My question is if Colorado case agrees that Trump incited an insurrection and refuse to put his no name on the ballot is this a state's right or is it federal. Where can Trump appeal?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/01/politics/colorado-14th-amendment-trump-day-three-takeaways/index.html

Question? It's totally partisan and they will. Supreme Court will rightfully overturn it but the state of CO will draaaaaagggg it out, hoping they can beat the clock.

Why do you think it’s partisan? If Trump planned the 1/6 events, how is it not violence against the government?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like someone is smoking too much marijuana out in CO.

Trump must be on the ballot. Or CO will turn into a total $hith*le state.

So now conservatives are against Federalism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I couldn't find another thread about this but it is fascinating. My question is if Colorado case agrees that Trump incited an insurrection and refuse to put his no name on the ballot is this a state's right or is it federal. Where can Trump appeal?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/01/politics/colorado-14th-amendment-trump-day-three-takeaways/index.html

Question? It's totally partisan and they will. Supreme Court will rightfully overturn it but the state of CO will draaaaaagggg it out, hoping they can beat the clock.

Why do you think it’s partisan? If Trump planned the 1/6 events, how is it not violence against the government?

There is no evidence at ALL that Trump planned the 1/6 events. In fact, evidence shows he offered the National Guard when chatter suggested there might be violent parties there.

The judge is highly partisan.