Oregon Supreme Court won’t remove Trump from ballot for now, says it’s waiting on SCOTUS - eviltoast
  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    He has already been found to be an insurrectionist in several courts now, that part is not up for debate, he is. If the Supreme Court rule that even if he is an insurrectionist it’s ok then they are saying the president is above the law, essentially the argument Trump’s lawyer was trying to make in his DC case. This would also mean we have just made Biden a dictator as he would no longer need to hold an election or step down. It would be King Biden until he hands the power over to someone else.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Found to be an insurrectionist, but not convicted of insurrection and that’s the rub, I don’t think the Supremes are going to be willing to put their thumb on the scale in a criminal case that hasn’t even gone to trial yet.

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It doesn’t say you have to be convicted of insurrection, just engage in insurrection, or give aid or comfort to those that did. And a vote of 2/3 from Congress and the Senate would be required to over-ride that (which will never happen) to remove that disqualification.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          The 14th was written in a simpler time, when it was easy to see who the Confederates were.

          Trump is making the argument that he wasn’t overthrowing anything, that he was attempting to preserve his legitimate government.

          Now you and I know that’s bullshit, but it’s not on the same level as, you know, signing articles of Confederacy and waging actual war.

          In the end, Jack Smith and the 1/6 trial will decide it, but I don’t think the Supremes are going to decide it before it even gets started

          • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s already been decided he did in several courts, it’s been determined to be a fact of law, he committed insurrection. The only piece of the puzzle is if the Supreme Court wants to weigh in on if it pertains to a President,or if they remain hands off and will just let every state decide their own interpretation of the amendment. Several states have already said he was allowed on the primary only because they didn’t feel like the 14th amendment applied to primary elections, but would 100% apply when it was time for federal election. So if left up to the states I think we would see even more of them do the correct thing here in order to comply with the constitution.