Of the arguments brought up in the Colorado case, there is one I like...

You can't have electors who only have one choice.
Thats why they would put in front of a judge.
States that don't abide by federal election laws don't get to participate in federal elections.
Pretty simple.

 

Really ? Well, I’m sure the state could find a third party candidate to put on the ballot. Problem solved .

And then there is the write in vote.

I’m sure the letter of the law would be compliant.

 

Nope, you start removing candidates from federal ballots and your electors will be voted out when the vote is called in DC.
Not following federal guidelines will eliminate that states right to have their electors counted.

 

The standard for the 14th amendments 3rd clause being triggered is what's at issue. It very much does matter whether or not an insurrection or its aiding and abetting occurred because that is what is cited in the clause as a necessary precondition.

It has been adjudicated there was by a court outside of its jurisdiction (state court ruling on federal issue) IE its like me declaring myself the King of Siam.

 

You would have to establish a Constitutional violation not a "guideline" violation. And that would first have to be adjudicated at the state level before the election.

 

Yes. Amending it is the proper way to repeal it.

 

You don't need to establish anything other than their failure to follow federal voting laws.
Too funny

 

Well, there certainly isn't enough time to "repeal" any Constitutional amendments now, so, given the validity of the 14th Amendment (as you have accurately pointed out) then it should stand that, in the sovereign State of Colorado, Donald Trump is forbidden to appear on any ballot -- period! And, that should also be true for any other sovereign state that declares Donald Trump participated in an "insurrection", and thus is henceforth and forever more ineligible for public office in the United States!

I'm breathless! I think we may have actually AGREED on something for a change!

. "Now WAIT just a damned minute...!"

 

The question of whether or not it was an insurrection was barely brought up, the court will NOT rule about that, and that was NOT the question brought before them.

They won't rule on whether January 6 was or wasn't an insurrection. I mean... you never know for sure with all these activist justices eager to legislate from the bench.... But I doubt it.

THIS thread is about one particular argument that would appear might be backed by the independent justices. And a ruling requiring that this be an insurrection or not is not necessary.

 

If you read the text of the 14th amendment, its very much necessary.

 

Then you will be unpleasantly surprised if the final ruling doesn't consider it necessary.

 

You lost 9-0

 

So all a criminal has to do is join an election and they get away with it.

 

No I didn't! As usual, you don't read.... I'm curious, do you ever get tired of being wrong?

 

I'll leave you to your fantasies that the Court wasn't 9-0 that Colorado had no just authity to remove Trump as a ballot choice for voters.

If these folks on the Left spent as much time trying to serve the American People as they do trying to rig ballots, they wouldn't' be trailing on so many metrics.

 

When did I EVER say that it would be any different?

This is why I have you on the list of posters I rarely respond to. You respond to posts you don't READ. Or, worse yet, maybe you read them but don't understand them.

You're even one of the uninformed posters who STILL thinks it was Democrats who were trying to remove Trump. It wasn't!

 

And yet, here you are.

It wasn't "Gorsuch's decision" it was 9-0 the Supreme Court's decision.

States have never had the power to add to the constitutional requirements for federal office.