States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment:

There is a growing movement in some states to conclude that Trump is already disqualified under the 14th Amendment and they may remove him from the ballot. This would set-up legal challenges from Trump that could end up at the SCOTUS.

The 14A disqualification doesn’t have any procedural requirements, it simply says that a person that does those things can’t serve in those offices. It a state says it applies to Trump, it would then be on Trump to show that it didn’t (either because what he didn’t doesn’t amount to the prohibited conduct, or that president isn’t an “officer” as intended by the amendment).

States are in charge of the ballots and can make eligibility determinations that are subject to appeal - there is actually a fairly interesting body of cases over the years with ballot challenges in federal court.


More on the legal argument in favor of this:

The Sweep and Force of Section Three

Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range

papers.ssrn.com

The Constitution Prohibits Trump From Ever Being President Again

The only question is whether American citizens today can uphold that commitment.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[J-DONK]

I didn't say they had to be found guilty. I asked you a question twice that you ignored.

I answered it both times. "The courts will decide." There is nothing in the 14th amendment that says you must be convicted of insurrection to be disqualified. The wording is "engaged in".

 

[samiam5211]

100%. CREW is a left wing organization and they filed the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Republicans.

 

[MT15]

I don't understand all the hand wringing, and whining? If Trump is kept off the ballot it will be decided by a conservative majority SC. Colorado is/was a swing state, with the judges facing state wide elections.

The 14th amendment is there for a reason. What I hear is "I would really like to ignore parts of the constitution I don't like."

He doesn’t know what the word “authoritarian” means. Nor does he know what due process is..

 

[MT15]

Nobody claimed that they didn't charge any BLM rioters. What people have said is that many had their charges dropped or they weren't charged at all.



Contrast that with how they charged January 6th defendants even if they only stepped one foot inside the perimeter and never entered the Capital building.

Do you have any clue how many people broke the law on Jan 6 and have never been charged? It is well over 1,000, maybe twice that. Plus you are comparing apples to oranges.

I believe that an attempt to overthrow an election and stop the peaceful transfer of power is far worse than taking part in a riot.

 

[MT15]

Does one have to try to stop Congress from counting votes to be involved in an insurrection?

No, it’s not the only way to have an insurrection. But it was the way the Jan 6 criminals were trying to do it.

 

[FullMonte]

Does one have to try to stop Congress from counting votes to be involved in an insurrection?

You didn't answer the question. We know why, and it's ok. But, yes, if they had the intent to stop Congress from doing their job, and they committed any violent acts, then it is, by definition, an insurrection. A violent uprising to interfere with the government doing their job.

Is the name of a rally a factor in determining if an insurrection occurred?

Yeah, it kinda is. If you attend a rally titled, "Let's Kill the Cops," and you bring a gun, and go out chanting "Kill the cops!" then you are not simply 'caught up in a riot.' If you attend an event titled "Stop the Steal," and then go break into the Capitol chanting "Hang Mike Pence!", you were not just 'caught up in a riot,' you showed up with the intent to stop congress.

 

[MT15]

You are complaining about thwarting norms after Democrats got the leading candidate from President removed from the ballot in Colorado?

Democrats didn’t get Trump removed from the ballot. And the justices on the CO Supreme Court were all elected - none were appointed like you said in a different post.

Trump got himself removed from the ballot. His actions led to a legal petition and after due process he was found to have disqualified himself.

Every time Trump broke the law or a norm while he was President, Rs either ignored it or made excuses for it. Every single time. He abused the system by using “acting” secretaries in his Cabinet far past the deadline to get them confirmed by the Senate. He and others in his Administration ignored the Emoluments Clause all the time. He mixed his campaign and presidential duties all the time, which is also violation of the law.

Here’s a handy list:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/lifestyle/magazine/trump-presidential-norm-breaking-list/

 

[FullMonte]

It's also not clear if Trump needs to have been found guilty of insurrection to be kept of the ballot.

It's pretty clear. The 14th has been used a handful of times to bar someone from holding office, and none of those individuals had been convicted.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Dictator for a day is something you take seriously as opposed to a political quip?

wait Now trump is lying? seems that selective choosing what lies to believe is a bit silly.

 

[superchuck500]

I don't know. Was it to take over the federal courthouse and destroy it?

If we twist things hard enough then maybe this applies to it.

What about CHOP or CHAZ or whatever it was called when they took over entire city blocks for 3 weeks in Seattle. Using the Democrat's logic that has to be an insurrection as well right?

No. You still apparently don’t get it - I know you’re not this dense. And that is not an ad-hominem attack, I know you’re smart enough to know the difference.

 

[brandon]

I don't know. Was it to take over the federal courthouse and destroy it?

If we twist things hard enough then maybe this applies to it.

What about CHOP or CHAZ or whatever it was called when they took over entire city blocks for 3 weeks in Seattle. Using the Democrat's logic that has to be an insurrection as well right?

You spend a lot of time saying what isn’t an insurrection.

So, what is your definition of insurrection? And please, use some sort of evidence (dictionary, legal definition, anything) to support your definition.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

You spend a lot of time saying what isn’t an insurrection.

So, what is your definition of insurrection? And please, use some sort of evidence (dictionary, legal definition, anything) to support your definition.

he thinks because it failed and there wasn't a wide use of weapons, it's not an insurrection.

 

[MT15]

he thinks because it failed and there wasn't a wide use of weapons, it's not an insurrection.

There was a wide use of weapons, though. Just ask the 148 police officers who were injured, some gravely. They didn’t use their guns, although there were guns there as well.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

There was a wide use of weapons, though. Just ask the 148 police officers who were injured, some gravely. They didn’t use their guns, although there were guns there as well.

let me rephrase that . wide use of guns..

 

[fooferdoggie]

let me rephrase that . wide use of guns..

well trump tried to change that too.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[Maxp]

Rhino, not a real conservative, etc, etc. The SFL's and more hard-core MAGAs will never see anything negative about Trump. It's all a conspiracy that always fits right into a nonsensical narrative. If there l was cosmic justice in the universe, the orange one would choke on a McDonald's hambirder.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Sarah Longwell said on a podcast that she fears we have entered a situation where there is no good direction to go. That each option that could happen will lead to bad outcomes.

It doesn't take a high IQ or exceptional observation skills to see what Longwell said. Case in point, I've been saying it on here for the past few months.

There is no outcome for the next election that doesn't end in Trump and his devoted followers not inflicting violence on society, so no one should be using "avoid Trump incited violence" as a factor in analyzing the best course of action. "Avoiding Trump incited violence" is a fool's errand.