Reply to Colorado case. To keep Trump off ballot

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Colorado case. To keep Trump off ballot"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Okay so when the Supreme Court reverses this because it violates due process are progs going to riot? It will be reversed [/quote]

You seem to have an odd understanding of due process.  Due process refers to, this section of the 5th Amendment:
[quote]nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[/quote]

How does declaring him ineligible to serve as POTUS based on a later Constitutional Amendment (the 14th) deprive him of life, liberty or property?

And as another PP pointed out, even if you somehow managed to believe that this somehow applies, he was given "due process of law" with the 5 day trial in Colorado where his lawyers participated and concurred with the evidence submitted.  They did not deny any of the evidence as presented.  And then, Trump, himself, was invited to testify, but chose not to.  So, how was he not accorded due process of law?
[/quote]

I'm nitpicking, but since it's Colorado supposedly working the deprivation, I think it would be the due process provision in the 14th (rather than the 5th) at issue. And, while I agree that disqualification from a federal office you'd like to have isn't a deprivation of life, liberty, or property at all -- it's not an argument that I find completely out of bounds. Like, if a court decided that the right to seek office is a protected liberty interest, I wouldn't have strong negative feelings about the decision. But ultimately that's beside the point because Trump got all kinds of process.[/quote]

But the due process portion of the 14th amendment says the exact same thing as the 5th:
[quote]Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; [u]nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[/u]; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.[/quote]

Okay, I'll grant you that this could be construed as a limitation on liberty.  According to the Legal Information Institute
[quote]The term “liberty” appears in the due process clauses of both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. As used in the Constitution, liberty means freedom from arbitrary and unreasonable restraint upon an individual.[/quote]
and it could be said that barring him from appearing on the state primary ballot could be considered depriving him of liberty of seeking public office, if this were considered arbitrary and unreasonable restraint upon him.

However, as so many others have pointed out, he was definitely accorded due process of law where there was a 5 day court case, where he had lawyers there representing him, the evidence was laid out, he did not deny any of the evidence and he refused the invitation to testify at the trial.  And the panel of judges unanimously agreed that the evidence presented showed he had committed insurrection against the federal government by his actions against Congress and the legslative branch of the government performing their Constitutional duties.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics