Sad
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Supreme Court stopped Colorado from disqualifying Trump's presidential run.

This is a major blow to Trump haters throughout the nation.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
specman · 51-55, M
In this case the Supreme Court ruled justly.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman Nope. They twisted themselves again for partisan purposes. Other Amendments such as the 26th have similar or identical reading regarding congressional responsibility. Should states be allowed to prevent people under 55 from voting? They could if the SCOTUS "logic" in the ruling is followed. Would you say the ruling is just if you can't vote?
sree251 · 41-45, M
@windinhishair The 26th Amendment was made to lower minimum voting age to 18. What has this got to do with the Colorado ruling by SCOTUS?
sladejr · 56-60, M
@windinhishair

[i]Would you say the ruling is just if you can't vote?[/i]

You mean the polar opposite of what the ruling was? I'd say no and so would the court. 9-0

Was that supposed to be some kind of argument?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@sladejr Republicans are doing everything in their power to prevent people from voting. That's why they do voter suppression wherever they can.

If a candidate I liked committed crimes against the nation and was removed from the ballot, I would have no issue with not being able to vote for them. In fact, I would not want to vote for someone who was a known criminal, as Trump is.

The Court ruling did not cite not being able to vote for a candidate as justification for their ruling.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair The states have no jurisdiction on Federal elections
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman Oh? You should tell the Texas voters and electors that they play no role in electing federal officials.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair States have no Authority to change anything in Federal elections
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman States have the right to present elector slates that help elect the President. States have a lot to do with federal elections, including representatives and senators.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair They can't say who can run and who can't
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman Without Florida's slate of electors in 2000, Al Gore is your president. So the states do indeed have a role.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman Sure they can. They can determine who is a resident and who is not. Wyoming decided Dick Cheney was a "resident" for the 2000 election, even though he lived and worked in Texas, because George W. Bush was a Texas resident and the President and Vice President cannot under the Constitution be residents of the same state. So voila! Cheney was declared a Wyoming resident.
sree251 · 41-45, M
@windinhishair Why can't a President and Vice President come from the same state?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@sree251 It is constitutionally prohibited.
sree251 · 41-45, M
@windinhishair Cite me the legal ruling?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@sree251 It isn't a legal ruling. It is part of the 12th Amendment.
sree251 · 41-45, M
@windinhishair It's too complicated.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair they couldn’t keep Trump off the ballot
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman They could, but chose not to. At least they will rule that he does not have total immunity for crimes committed while in office. Stay tuned.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair they couldn’t keep him off the ballot. That is what this post is about. You might look at the Supreme Court’s ruling.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman That was their ruling, but they could have ruled differently and would have been justified in doing so. Four Justices believed the ruling should have been different and stated so as part of the ruling.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair 9-0 Colorado could not take him off the ballot.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman That's how they ruled, and extended the ruling further to any federal official. With four Justices writing two opinions that the ruling went too far. A future Court could rule differently and it would be just as lawful.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair actually the Supreme Court is the highest court. No lower court can change their ruling
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@specman Yes, and this Court has decided to reverse previous decisions, like replacing Roe v. Wade with the Dobbs decision. At some point that decision will be reversed again when we have a non-Republican partisan Court. A future Court could well rule differently on the Trump ballot case, or at least limit its extent. It may depend on whether there is another insurrection when Trump loses this fall.
specman · 51-55, M
@windinhishair I go by the supreme court’s ruling making Colorado put President Trump back on the ballot.