Is Trump Eligible to Run Again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

Due process in what? Interpretation of amendment doesn’t require due process.

any constitutional challenges (rather than a statutory challenge based on a “wrongful act”) must be brought under the normal jurisdictional rules that apply to constitutional cases. And in any event, election challenges must move quickly given their nature, the procedures in this case were thorough, and Trump did not identify any particular ways in which he was supposedly denied a fair hearing. (Over at Reason, Ilya Somin argues that depriving someone of public office doesn’t deprive them of life, liberty, or property, and therefore the Due Process Clause doesn’t even apply.)

https://www.cato.org/blog/agree-it-o...iumph-judicial

---

Guess the party affiliation that makes up all members of the Colorado Supreme Court?

Ok, so no due process. So you’re ok if some judges arbitrarily decide based on their interpretation of the Constitution that so-and-so candidate engaged in an insurrection & block him from a ballot? They are preemptively deciding his guilt or innocence without all the evidence and court procedures.

It’s anti-democratic what they are doing. Putin does this kinda shit. Jinping does this kinda shit. This is America. We don't let the government elites decide for its citizens whom they can vote for.

Come on now…this isn’t the American way of doing things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

Show me in the 14th amendment, section 3, that he needs to be tried, convicted or found guilty or anything along those lines, to be ineligible under the 14th amendment.
Colorado Supreme Court ruled that he was “engaging in an insurrection” by law, that makes him not eligible.
Until SCOTUS clarifies this amendment, he in fact has violated the constitution, as it is written.

---

Biden engaged in insurrection.

I expect him to be already out of office by morning, now that I have declared this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Guess the party affiliation that makes up all members of the Colorado Supreme Court?

Ok, so no due process. So you’re ok if some judges arbitrarily decide based on their interpretation of the Constitution that so-and-so candidate engaged in an insurrection & block him from a ballot? They are preemptively deciding his guilt or innocence without all the evidence and court procedures.

It’s anti-democratic what they are doing. Putin does this kinda shit. Jinping does this kinda shit. This is America. We don't let the government elites decide for its citizens whom they can vote for.

Come on now…this isn’t the American way of doing things.

---

Whaaaaaaaaat? I'm so confused. Solkern said Trump doesn't get due process. I mean, he posted a blog post about it and everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Whaaaaaaaaat? I'm so confused. Solkern said Trump doesn't get due process. I mean, he posted a blog post about it and everything.

---

https://y.yarn.co/e16b4ca1-c379-43df...4b845_text.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Biden engaged in insurrection.

I expect him to be already out of office by morning, now that I have declared this.

---

Oh I like this, and fully support this (Solkern approved, tm pending) interpretation. I also state for fact that Kamala, Schumer, and let's say the first 50 alphabetically sorted Democrat congress people also engaged in insurrection (ok I'll settle for JUST the Jan 6 committee members) and they are all also off every ballot per the landmark Colorado interpretation. Oh, HAHA, the Republican members of the J6 committee already are... but they were only voted out, that doesn't seem fair. Ok, I'll stick with the first 50 alphabetically sorted Democrat congress people, plus the entire squad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Oh I like this, and fully support this (Solkern approved, tm pending) interpretation. I also state for fact that Kamala, Schumer, and let's say the first 50 alphabetically sorted Democrat congress people also engaged in insurrection (ok I'll settle for JUST the Jan 6 committee members) and they are all also off every ballot per the landmark Colorado interpretation. Oh, HAHA, the Republican members of the J6 committee already are... but they were only voted out, that doesn't seem fair. Ok, I'll stick with the first 50 alphabetically sorted Democrat congress people, plus the entire squad.

---

Seran also engaged in insurrection. And being that insurrection is a felony, Seran is no longer allowed to vote.

Welcome to the new America. Instead of fair and impartial judgement in the courts, political affiliation is the most important element in deciding the outcome of a case. And just watch…the leftists on our boards who will ridicule me here & now on that statement will be more or less saying the same thing when SCOTUS overturns it.

https://nypost.com/2023/12/20/news/m...he-ballot/amp/

Quote:

---

Four liberal Colorado Supreme Court justices were behind the landmark ruling Monday night that former President Donald Trump would not be allowed to appear on the 2024 presidential ballot in the state.

The Democrat-appointed justices who made the decision include three Ivy League graduates — two of whom were wrongfully accused of harassment and discrimination — as well as the first Latina and openly gay woman to serve on Colorado’s highest court.

Their ruling marks the first time in history that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment — which disqualifies insurrectionists from office — has been used to ban a presidential candidate from appearing on the ballot.

Together, Justices Richard L. Gabriel, Melissa Hart, Monica Márquez and William W. Hood III said they had ”little difficulty” in determining that the events of Jan. 6, 2021, constitute an insurrection and that Trump did “engage” in the alleged rebellion.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Guess the party affiliation that makes up all members of the Colorado Supreme Court?

Ok, so no due process. So you’re ok if some judges arbitrarily decide based on their interpretation of the Constitution that so-and-so candidate engaged in an insurrection & block him from a ballot? They are preemptively deciding his guilt or innocence without all the evidence and court procedures.

It’s anti-democratic what they are doing. Putin does this kinda shit. Jinping does this kinda shit. This is America. We don't let the government elites decide for its citizens whom they can vote for.

Come on now…this isn’t the American way of doing things.

---

You seem to think the Constitution needs to always be interpreted to mean whatever is politically expedient, but that's not how it works. Trump engaged in an insurrection, it's been decided and a limited stay was issued to allow time for an appeal. Unless and until the Supreme Court decides to overturn the ruling, it's legally binding.

https://i.imgur.com/54jbgXn.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You seem to think the Constitution needs to always be interpreted to mean whatever is politically expedient, but that's not how it works. Trump engaged in an insurrection, it's been decided and a limited stay was issued to allow time for an appeal. Unless and until the Supreme Court decides to overturn the ruling, it's legally binding.

---

If and when SCOTUS overturns the decision are you going to shut the fuck up & accept it, or cry like a little bitch about how they were wrong? I’m going to save this post and remind you of it later.