The Supreme Court did not say!!

T. A. Gardner said:
Not for Trump being charged with insurrection there hasn't been.
Click to expand...

yes there was.

There was a lower court trial with a finding of FACT that Trump engaged in Insurrection.

A reaffirmation of that FINDING OF FACT by the State Supreme Court.

A reaffirmation of that State SC finding by SCOTUS that Trump committed insurrection.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
on the issue of whether Colorado had the right to keep him off the ballot under any circumstances, whether based on their fucked up lib'rul fantasies or anything else......
Click to expand...

yes.

this was a shotgun blast scold against all of trumps kangaroo court banana republic assailants.

the republic has rejected the criminalization of maga.

we are the future.

:magagrin:
 
QP! said:
yes there was.

There was a lower court trial with a finding of FACT that Trump engaged in Insurrection.

A reaffirmation of that FINDING OF FACT by the State Supreme Court.

A reaffirmation of that State SC finding by SCOTUS that Trump committed insurrection.
Click to expand...

Was Trump or Trump's lawyers allowed to present opposing evidence and cross examine witnesses and evidence? Or, did the judge just arbitrarily rule without a hearing or trial to determine that?
 
Flash said:
Good points. The only caveats I can see is that those people removed from office following the passage of the 14th were never charged and convicted of insurrection. Each house removed members from office which at least had an official body make the decision.

The other possible issue depends on state laws about primaries. Primaries are party functions and not state actions and may not be applicable. However, some states make detailed laws regulation primaries while other leave many of the decisions to the political parties.
Click to expand...

On those cases the law codifying and defining Insurrection had not yet been passed, but the Amendment gave them the power to make the decisions to allow or deny ballot access, the congress acted with their authority given in Section 5 of the Amendment. Since that time they have, again within their authority, defined and codified what Insurrection is in the aforementioned USC Section 2383. This makes it so that someone can be convicted of the Federal crime of Insurrection, if they were convicted of this Federal Crime it would meet the aspects of the Amendment 14 Sections 5 and 1 that I have described herein.

All elections are state run elections, not just Primaries, but they do not get to decide who is eligible to run for President, that eligibility is also listed in the Constitution, which gave Congress the authority to act on and to enact laws regarding Amendment 14, which they did later when they codified a definition in law for Insurrection as described in Amendment 14.

Secretaries of State or any authority below the Constitutional guidelines, simply do not have the authority to just "decide" such things. Imagine if they did. The Texas SoS would just decide that allowing border crossing without regard to the law was "Insurrection" as they are trying to "take over the government" by "importing illegal voters"... Suddenly Biden is no longer allowed on their ballot because some partisan hack has decided he just cannot be... Florida follows suit, Alabama, and every state with a republican SoS... magic and feels are simply not due process and they just don't have this authority.
 
the USSC has found as a matter of fact and law that the Colorado courts are ignorant and should not mess around with constitutional amendments they do not understand......
 
Jarod said:
Very interesting to me that the Supreme Court did not say Trumps actions were not an insurrection, they simply said States do not have the power to remove him after such a finding.


They could have said, Trump was innocent, they refused to do so.
Click to expand...

You are ignoring the 5th amendment again.
 
QP! said:
Yes.

Just as impeachment does with certain offices if impeached and convicted in Senate and House. YOu are then prevented from holding office.
Click to expand...

impeachment is a removal from office. not similar at all. not applicable. you're dumb.
 
All this is so much whistling in the dark. SC ruled the insurrection clause is currently not enforceable and won't be until Congress enacts legislation for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top