Will the Supreme Court rule on the decision by Colorado and Maine to remove Trump from the primary ballot and how would they decide?
I am pretty certain the court will take up the case. There has never been a case involving the 14th Amendment. I also think they will overrule the decision and, as much as I dislike Trump, I think that may be the correct way to go.
Even if it is certain that Trump led an insurrectiion and the 14th Amendment prevents him from becoming president, the state Republicans should still be allowed to choose him, as foolish as that decision may be. It is bothersome to think that the federal government can interfere with state primaries.
Consider the following. Several states are part of a movement to have states join them in giving their electoral votes to whichever candidate wins the popular vote. They will not do this until they reach a point where the states involved have a majority of the electoral votes. This would in effect eliminate the electoral college. Should this be permitted? Absolutely.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
11 Answers
Yes, this is the next step to the appeal.
Julu 2020 – The Supreme Court unanimously ruled, “A State may enforce an elector’s pledge to support his party’s nominee—and the state voters’ choice—for President. … Electors are not free agents; they are to vote for the candidate whom the State’s voters have chosen.”
Every presidential election brings renewed debate about the Electoral College. The discussion resonates even more this year, since Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016 despite losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million.
Since he was acquitted by the Senate on insurrection, I personally think the SC will overrule the states. But as we’ve seen with marijuana legalization and abortion, leaving it to each state to decide is also possible.
Pelosi and many others on the Left are concerned about backlash, by taking the choice from voters. It’s very interesting to see play out.
Best case scenario is they do not even touch the cases and refuse to take them on, leaving each state’s decision standing, while not providing any overriding precedence.
Likely scenario, based on their corruption, is they rule for the orangutan.
The Republicans in the Senate voting to acquit Trump of insurrection, was partisan political bullshit.
And also, politicians afraid of the anger of the nutjob MAGA fringe.
Which is to say, not based on evidence, nor on legal reasoning.
If the Supreme Court makes similar rulings for political reasons, then it would be failing to even pretend to do its job.
They would also have to write a cogent opinion saying why.
That pretty much says it all^^^^!
No.
The decision is easy. Trump built the SCOTUS for just this type of shit.
He appointed three. One was clearly stolen from Obama by the GOP.
It’s not fun watching people screw the country/world. They don’t even hide it anymore.
I think they will not take it on and turn it back to the states . . . .
Trump is toast
Since he was acquitted by the Senate on insurrection
There’s a bogus argument that Trump can’t be held responsible because of double jeopardy – because he was acquitted once the question is moot. It’s nonsense and I think even the current Supreme Court will wave it away.
Impeachment has no bearing or relation to criminal liability. It is a not a criminal trial. It’s a political process. As Gerald Ford said (paraphrasing),“an impeachable offense is whatever the current Congress members say is an impeachable offense.”
@Call_Me_Jay
It certainly is a bogus argument. But that does not rule out that the supreme court would not use it anyway, as far gone as they are.
They took it and Trump and his lawyer (Alina Habba) are whining . . you owe me (Trump) ! ! ! !
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
