Supreme Court declines to hear long-shot 14th Amendment challenge to disqualify Trump

Well, that's a wrap. We can stop with the 14th Amendment junk, now. I know this won't stop some folks, though.

Castro lost in a lower court, the SC basically told him to sod off, so this is a dead issue.

 

The picture will change should Trump be found guilty in any of the ~100 indictments and lawsuits.

It's common for the high court to want lower courts to rule before they do, unless its an emergency.

 

No it won't. Trump still won't be convicted of treason.

When did 9 charges get tacked on?...lol

 

When they're making them up, what is a few extra.... They'll probably find a another civil war era law to tack on to it...

 

True. We are talking about the same folks who think Russia collusion is real...lol

 

But, But, But.....Russia collusion is real.... Clinton Plan
ever heard of the Steele Dossier... manufactured by a foreign agent working with the Russians... hired by Hillary Clinton's gang....
And then our own government then takes the fake manufactured intel and uses it on American citizens and tried to overthrow our own government in a failed coup attempt and insurrection against a duly elected president... with the full knowledge and participation of Obama and Biden... Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine ? Heck our own government was willing to pay $1 mil tax payer money to the foreign agent Steele if he could just make it all come true to overthrow the duly elected president.... wow if that ain't treason I don't know what is...

And it really happened again.....
There was a Trump Tower meeting with a Russian plant lawyer by the Hillary campaign.... the Russian who was denied entry in the country for the longest time and then suddenly got her pass about the same time she was meeting with Hillary Clintons hired Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS... they met the day before and the day after the meeting.... they met before and after in two different cities.... what are the odds of that happening...

 

I never gave much credence to using the 14th amendment to charge Trump. Oh he is an evil piece of anti America schiest man
and hates our democratic republic all right but that is the wrong tool to bring. Just bet him to justice on the document case and keep marching along and remember that no one is above the law. And no he cannot do anything that he wants against our country.

 

That's not what your article says. This was one person's case, wanting Trump's name to be stricken from all ballots. But there are potentially state cases, to bar Trump from just their own ballots, which would be valid unless the courts struck them down. If a state did this, it would almost certainly be heard by the SCOTUS.

<Snip>
John Castro, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, has filed various lawsuits seeking to challenge Trump’s eligibility under the amendment’s provision targeting those involved in insurrections...

“The Supreme Court can deny to hear the case but appellate courts cannot,” Castro responded on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter.

“I’m still pursuing decisions in the liberal appellate courts and there’s a full blown trial scheduled for October 20 in New Hampshire and a bench trial in Arizona on October 31,” he added.

Beyond Castro’s cases, various other lawsuits have been launched against Trump under the 14th Amendment, which states no person shall hold elected office who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a lawsuit in Colorado on behalf of a group of voters there, and similar lawsuits are ongoing in places including Minnesota and Michigan.

Legal experts have been split as to whether the 14th Amendment can be applied to Trump over his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
<End Snip>

 

Well they will need to simultaneously ignore the Biden document case because Biden is above the law. They seem to be doing a pretty god job at that.

 

There are of other challenges, some with better merit in law

 

What “document case”? The one where as soon as the documents were discovered they were handed over? The one where there was no obstruction of justice? The one being examined by a special prosecutor?

 

With Russia - follow the money. I know that the right is echoing Trump on this but there really was enough there that Mueller did not declare innocence

 

Well, they were handed over after Bidens attorneys combed through them. Likely eliminating anything that would make Biden look bad. And Biden merely possessing them violates the law

 

This is just about all the right does these days

 

Declared innocence as far as collusion with Russia. Says he cant exonerate of obstruction of justice after the fact. And with the Durham report we now know at most it would be obstruction of blatant FBI injustice.

 

Nothing says promoting democracy like judge shopping to remove your political opponents from the ballot.

 

??? Its not complicated at all. Why else would you have your attorneys comb through them first? Unless you are a Trump, anything they do falls under the attorney client privilege.

 

WTF are you saying? That Biden's lawyers threw away classified documents? Are you out of your gourd? What makes you think that attorneys would knowingly commit a serious federal crime? Why would they then even turn in any documents, as this story did make Biden "look bad?" Your comment is baseless, and blatant conspiracy nonsense!

<Snip>
Sauber also said that on the same day the material was discovered, Nov. 2, the White House counsel's office notified the National Archives, which took possession of the materials the following morning.

"The discovery of these documents was made by the President's attorneys," Sauber said. "The documents were not the subject of any previous request or inquiry by the Archives. Since that discovery, the President's personal attorneys have cooperated with the Archives and the Department of Justice in a process to ensure that any Obama-Biden Administration records are appropriately in the possession of the Archives."

A source familiar with the matter said representatives from the National Archives then notified the Justice Department.

Garland assigned U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois John Lausch to find out how the material marked classified ended up at the Penn Biden Center. The review is considered a preliminary step, and the attorney general will determine whether further investigation is necessary, including potentially appointing a special counsel.

Lausch was nominated to be U.S. attorney by former President Donald Trump, and he is one of only two current Trump-era U.S. attorneys still serving. The other is Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who is leading an investigation into the president's son, Hunter Biden.
<End Snip>

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/biden-center-classified-documents/?bshm=rime/2

 

They "combed through," just to make sure that there were no government documents which didn't belong. IOW, the answer is that Biden was being responsible and careful, even if he had been less scrupulously so, back when these documents were overlooked. But we will get a report about how these documents ended up here, from the U.S. attorney who AG Garland appointed to investigate this, John Launch who, other than David Weiss, who is prosecuting Hunter Biden, is the only other U.S. attorney from the Trump administration, still serving (see my previous snip).


<Snip>
The material was identified by personal attorneys for Mr. Biden on Nov. 2, just before the midterm elections, Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president confirmed. The documents were discovered when Mr. Biden's personal attorneys "were packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, D.C.," Sauber said in a statement to CBS News. The documents were contained in a folder that was in a box with other unclassified papers, the sources said. The sources revealed neither what the documents contain nor their level of classification. A source familiar with the matter told CBS News the documents did not contain nuclear secrets.
<End Snip>

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/biden-center-classified-documents/?bshm=rime/2


*And btw, you are wrong that any conversations about breaking the law, are protected by attorney- client privilege.

 

Castro lost in a lower court. The SC refuses to hear the case. It's over.

State courts can't overrule Federal courts.

 

None of those changes have legal merit.

 

We will see

 

There is a fascist regime in the United States today. And I would not be surprised if this regime tries to physically destroy Trump. Remember JFK.

 

His case, you mean (though Castro does not agree, that "it's over," because he can still use Appellate Courts). But his is not the only attempt to have Trump's name removed from ballots-- as both I, and your article, from which I provided a snip, explained. Castro's case has nothing to do with the cases being brought in individual states. I think Castro is actually trying to get Trump's name removed from ballots in the Republican Primary.

OMG. The SCOTUS' declining to hear a case, does not equate to a federal court ruling on this overall issue. If you do not recall, from the Trump team's arguing this point, in 2020: each state handles its own election; the Constitution does not, in a general sense, give the federal government jurisdiction over state election policies. You previously had the premature thread, about New Hampshire being on the verge of violating the Constitution, or some such bogus nonsense, just because the Secretary of State was open to, would not rule out, the idea of removing Trump, as a ballot option. Still, he had said that he did not think he, personally, should make such a decision, but that it should be left to the courts.

Your article here, lists court cases pending in Colorado, Minnesota, & Michigan (interestingly leaving out NH-- in which your article for that thread had quoted a Republican politician who was considering bringing a similar case, in that state; Castro, however, is quoted as saying that he has a case scheduled to be heard, in both NH, and AZ). So, if the state courts rule that the 14th Amendment is applicable, they could take Trump's name off their ballot. There is no Federal court ruling, stating otherwise.

All that said, this is not something for which I am an advocate, & am dubious of the success of these suits. I am just correcting your erroneously feeble attempts at interpreting the ramifications of facts.

 

It's over. Live with it. Castro can't legally go judge shopping. He lost in a lower court. He appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case. It...is...over.