Article

2024-02-08 Home Front: Politix

Supreme Court justices indicate they'll keep Trump on 2024 ballot in landmark case

[NY Post] A clear majority of the Supreme Court’s nine justices signaled Thursday that they would overturn a Colorado ruling barring former President Donald Trump from the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot.

The former president, 77, and his lawyers were appealing the Dec. 19 decision by Colorado’s Supreme Court that found Trump ineligible for the March 5 Republican contest by virtue of violating the Constitution’s so-called "Insurrection Clause" during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

Trump’s team argued separately that Congress — not the states — was tasked with enforcing the clause, that the provision did not apply to the office of president, and denied that the 45th president engaged in an insurrection by seeking to remain in office after his 2020 election defeat by Joe Biden.

During oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts fretted about the possibility that upholding the Colorado ruling would open the door to red and blue states removing politicians of opposing parties from the ballot on a whim.

"It’ll come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election. That’s a pretty daunting consequence," Roberts said.

"Your Honor, the fact that there are potential frivolous applications of a constitutional provision isn’t a reason," argued attorney Jason Murray, representing a group of Colorado voters who sought to remove Trump from the ballot.

"The question you have to confront," liberal Justice Elena Kagan told Murray at another point in his argument, "is why one state should decide who gets to be president of the United States."

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito asked Murray about a hypothetical in which an administration for "diplomatic reasons think that it’s in the best interests of the "US to send funds to a foreign nation who described Washington as "its biggest enemy" — a clear reference to the Obama-Biden policy toward Iran.

Posted by Frank G 2024-02-08 12:16|| || Front Page|| [40 views ] Top

#1 Trying to put off a civil war till after the next fixed election.

Posted by Procopius2k 2024-02-08 13:43|| 2024-02-08 13:43|| Front Page Top

#2 If Kagan is skeptical, Colorado is going to lose. Murry comes across as insolent, not a good look.

Posted by Too Old To Work 2024-02-08 14:08|| 2024-02-08 14:08|| Front Page Top

#3 ^Kagen has never been as much of "team blue" justice as she's made out to be. Though Sotomayor definitely us. And we'll have to see about Jackson in the long run.

Posted by Secret Master 2024-02-08 15:40|| 2024-02-08 15:40|| Front Page Top

#4 Unlike the usual "narrowly tailored" ruling, I think this time the court will signal "We don't want to see this issue again. Period."

Posted by M. Murcek 2024-02-08 15:45|| 2024-02-08 15:45|| Front Page Top

#5 hope you're right murcek

Posted by Chris 2024-02-08 18:47|| 2024-02-08 18:47|| Front Page Top

#6 Justice Thomas made it clear in this hearing that after the Civil War was over (an insurrection of Southern States against the Union), the U.S. did NOT prevent candidates who took part in the insurrection from running for U.S. Congress or for President.

Posted by Beldar Uneter3543 2024-02-08 19:08|| 2024-02-08 19:08|| Front Page Top

15:37 trailing wife
15:33 M. Murcek
15:26 European Conservative
15:26 Chens Ghibelline3637
15:21 DooDahMan
15:16 Elmerert Hupens2660
15:16 Grom the reflective
15:13 trailing wife
15:10 trailing wife
15:04 Super Hose
15:02 Super Hose
14:59 Super Hose
14:58 Super Hose
14:54 Grom the reflective
14:53 Super Hose
14:45 Super Hose
14:45 Crusader
14:42 Super Hose
14:32 Super Hose
14:26 Super Hose
14:24 NoMoreBS
14:21 Super Hose
14:13 NoMoreBS
14:11 Super Hose