States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification (2 Viewers)

[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

 

[SaintForLife]

Yeah, but there’s no justification for trying to remove Biden. There’s all the justification in the world to remove Trump.

Spoken like a true partisan.

 

[SaintForLife]

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Maine’s Democratic secretary of state on Thursday removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot under the Constitution’s insurrection clause, becoming the first election official to take action unilaterally in a decision that has potential Electoral College consequences.

While Maine has just four electoral votes, it’s one of two states to split them. Trump won one of Maine’s electors in 2020, so having him off the ballot there should he emerge as the Republican general election candidate could have outsized implications in a race that is expected to be narrowly decided.

The decision by Secretary of State Shenna Bellows follows a December ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court that booted Trump from the ballot there under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Colorado is a Democratic-leaning state that is not expected to be competitive for Republicans in November.


Bellows found that Trump could no longer run for his prior job because his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol violated Section 3, which bans from office those who “engaged in insurrection.” Bellows made the ruling after some state residents, including a bipartisan group of former lawmakers, challenged Trump’s position on the ballot.……..

Maine bars Trump from ballot as US Supreme Court weighs states' authority to block former president

Maine’s Democratic secretary of state became the first election official to take action unilaterally as the Supreme Court is set to rule if Trump remains eligible to run.

apnews.com

The US would threaten sanctions on a country if they removed their political opponent from the ballot.

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[SaintForLife]

When even CNN's legal analyst is pointing this out...

 

[MT15]

This is total nonsense - worse than Susan Collins. Amash is an idiot. How is it “extra-constitutional” to actually follow the constitution? Like the tweet I posted earlier said - there are legal arguments to be made about this. Is the office of President covered by this amendment and did Trump give aid and comfort or take part in an insurrection? But that’s it. What Amash said is simply not true and a serious person wouldn’t be trying that angle of it at all. He’s being very dishonest here.

 

[efil4]

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State...

I highligted the part you and your supposed experts just gloss over.....

ANY

OFFICE

Civil or Military

 

[MT15]

The US would threaten sanctions on a country if they removed their political opponent from the ballot.

This is complete bull shirt. You should know better. Every one of these decisions has followed due process and if you had bothered to even read a few snippets of her decision you would see that she didn’t want to take this up, she was required by Maine law to make a ruling and in a very short period of time from when the challenge was filed.

She has also pre-emptively stayed the ruling - keeping Trump on the ballot - until courts can weigh in.

Do you believe in the American Constitution or nah?

You won’t answer, because it’s evident that you don’t. Or at least you’re selective about what you want to take seriously and what you want to ignore.

 

[MT15]

Spoken like a true partisan.

Where has Biden gone astray of this requirement?

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Spoken like a true partisan.

can you site from the Constitution that would bar Biden from the ballot?

 

[Huntn]

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

Trump is the epitome of why this was writtem, although it was intended for post Civil War for Southerners who might want to dismantle the Republic. But it should work well for any insurrectionist especially one as obvious as Poor Little Donny and his band of MAGA Losers… that would be if half the Congress was not populated with poison drinking insurrectionists..

 

[fooferdoggie]

[Mod Edit Partisan triggering term] "Trump" did the crime, now he can do the time. Poor widdle snowflake.

he is claiming he is immune because he was president at the time. How can yo use immune from something you did not do?

 

[SaintForLife]

So odd that what is considered “authoritarian” by certain folks is merely our system of laws working as intended.

Why would somebody who supposedly supports America want someone to be president who has so clearly demonstrated that he has zero respect for laws and our Constitution? Quick answer that comes to mind: nobody who actually believes in America and its concepts of government would want that.

I highligted the part you and your supposed experts just gloss over.....

ANY

OFFICE

Civil or Military

Trump is the epitome of why this was writtem, although it was intended for post Civil War for Southerners who might want to dismantle the Republic. But it should work well for any insurrectionist especially one as obvious as Poor Little Donny and his band of MAGA Losers… that would be if half the Congress was not populated with poison drinking insurrectionists..

I see all of you have conveniently ignored what someone posted recently in this thread about how the Supreme Court had said in 2010 that the president is not considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment.

In Free Enterprise Fund vs Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight board, Roberts stated "the people do not vote for the 'Officers of the United States., rather officers are appointed by the president pursuant to Article II, section 2." Also, the Constitution's impeachment clause said that the president, vice president, "and all officers of the United States," not "all OTHER officers of the United States."

States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification

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...

madaboutpolitics.com

 

[Huntn]

he is claiming he is immune because he was president at the time. How can yo use immune from something you did not do?

Trump’s problem is that he acted outside of any role POTUS had, when he interfered in the election at the State level to favor his re-election.

 

[SaintForLife]

This is complete bull shirt. You should know better. Every one of these decisions has followed due process and if you had bothered to even read a few snippets of her decision you would see that she didn’t want to take this up, she was required by Maine law to make a ruling and in a very short period of time from when the challenge was filed.

She has also pre-emptively stayed the ruling - keeping Trump on the ballot - until courts can weigh in.

Do you believe in the American Constitution or nah?

You won’t answer, because it’s evident that you don’t. Or at least you’re selective about what you want to take seriously and what you want to ignore.

Do tell how an evidentiary hearing and a unilateral decision by a secretary of state is due process.

The Supreme Court has already ruled in 2010 that the president isn't considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment. So you don't believe in the Constitution and the Supreme Court apparently.

She didn't want to take this up?

 

[Huntn]

I see all of you have conveniently ignored what someone posted recently in this thread about how the Supreme Court had said in 2010 that the president is not considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment.

In Free Enterprise Fund vs Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight board, Roberts stated "the people do not vote for the 'Officers of the United States., rather officers are appointed by the president pursuant to Article II, section 2." Also, the Constitution's impeachment clause said that the president, vice president, "and all officers of the United States," not "all OTHER officers of the United States."

States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification

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...

madaboutpolitics.com

So you are actually arguing that the President of this United States should be immune when he commits treason or any illegal act?? Reread post one, besides all the other qualifiers, it says “or Officer”.

 

[MT15]

Do tell how an evidentiary hearing and a unilateral decision by a secretary of state is due process.

The Supreme Court has already ruled in 2010 that the president isn't considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment. So you don't believe in the Constitution and the Supreme Court apparently.

She didn't want to take this up?

Your only problem here is that in one of his many criminal defenses Trump is arguing that he IS an officer of the United States. Typical Trump doublespeak - which you do not care about.

I don’t think you understand this issue fully, and I know I don’t. So we will just have to wait for the courts to decide on it. I don’t think it’s as much of a slam dunk as your MAGA “influencers” claim, or there wouldn’t be credible Constitutional scholars behind this use.

Yes, the ME SOS didn’t initiate this and she didn’t want to decide it. That’s the truth, which I know you don’t value nearly as much as you value partisan lies.

 

[efil4]

I see all of you have conveniently ignored what someone posted recently in this thread about how the Supreme Court had said in 2010 that the president is not considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment.

In Free Enterprise Fund vs Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight board, Roberts stated "the people do not vote for the 'Officers of the United States., rather officers are appointed by the president pursuant to Article II, section 2." Also, the Constitution's impeachment clause said that the president, vice president, "and all officers of the United States," not "all OTHER officers of the United States."

States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification

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...

madaboutpolitics.com

Show me in sec 3 where it says " officer" - it doesnt- it says OFFICE. President of the United States is an "office" of Government. Senator is an "office".

I see all of you have conveniently ignored what someone posted recently in this thread about how the Supreme Court had said in 2010 that the president is not considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment.

In Free Enterprise Fund vs Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight board, Roberts stated "the people do not vote for the 'Officers of the United States., rather officers are appointed by the president pursuant to Article II, section 2." Also, the Constitution's impeachment clause said that the president, vice president, "and all officers of the United States," not "all OTHER officers of the United States."

States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification

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...

madaboutpolitics.com

Is the President an "Officer of the United States"? Originalism vs. Textualism

Following the Colorado District Court’s ruling on Trump’s presidential eligibility under Section Three, the arguments that the president is neither an "off

papers.ssrn.com

This is why its headed to court.

imo, if one has the ability to "appoint officers", then by that very ability, that makes them "head officer". A company President is an officer. A CEO- Chief Executive Officer. Chairman of the Board- officer. So it stands to reason that the President of the United States, while an elected official, is charged with the oversight and monitoring of the US to carry out his vision/plan/management of these United States.

That would make him an officer.

 

[SaintForLife]

Your only problem here is that in one of his many criminal defenses Trump is arguing that he IS an officer of the United States. Typical Trump doublespeak - which you do not care about.

I don’t think you understand this issue fully, and I know I don’t. So we will just have to wait for the courts to decide on it. I don’t think it’s as much of a slam dunk as your MAGA “influencers” claim, or there wouldn’t be credible Constitutional scholars behind this use.

Yes, the ME SOS didn’t initiate this and she didn’t want to decide it. That’s the truth, which I know you don’t value nearly as much as you value partisan lies.

You think what Trump is arguing somehow cancels out that the Supreme Court has already said that the President is not considered an officer in regards to the 14th ammendment?

I don't know the issue? I know what the Supreme Court said about it and how you and many are ignoring the fact that Trump or any president wouldn't meet the criteria for removal from the ballot.

Your last paragraph is laughable and nobody would believe that except partisan Democrats.