Supreme Court Will Decide Early October 2023 if Donald Trump Can Be U.S. President Again.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: network dude

I think every single one of you wants him gone because you know he’s going to lose AGAIN.

But, it looks like he’s going to be your guy and it’s absolutely hilarious to me.

It seems we are both pretty happy about this. Common ground. Perhaps you are missing those returns in the old 401K, and you know Trump will bring them back. It's OK to be a little greedy, we all need to recoup some cash after Bidenomics raped us for 4 years.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: network dude

According to this court case? The Republicans.

all of them? Or just a couple? This is amazing stuff. I had no idea you had such a firm grasp of the Republican party.

a reply to: network dude

I think it's a higher number than you're thinking. Between this lawsuit and the comments from the Federalist Society, I think the more traditional Conservatives and Constitutionalists have reached their breaking point with Trump.

a reply to: Threadbare

The Bush, Barr, McConnell, Graham traditional conservatives you refer to, can stay home in 2024. It will not change the outcome.

Donald Trump will win if Joe Biden or Kamala Devi Harris is the candidate he faces.

a reply to: carewemust

I'm more referring to the type of Conservatives that sit on the Supreme Court. You are aware that all of them have ties to the Federalist Society, right? In fact Clarence Thomas' wife started the very first PAC with the chairman of the Federalist Society, Leonard Leo and they regularly vacation together.

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: marg6043
The suit is being brought by a Republican.

RINO...

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: carewemust

The People did decide on this matter when they voted to adopt the 14th Amendment.

Did they abolish the Right to Trial by Jury in said Amendment? Did they explicitly state that ineligibility could be based on a simple accusation with no basis in reality?

a reply to: tanstaafl

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 legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 3 makes no statements as to what triggers it. If we look at other parts of the Constitution the phrase "No person shall," implies that it auto-triggers once one takes part in acts of insurrection.

The courts have allowed private parties to ask for judges to issue a writ of quo warranto in the past. Although, most of those fail due to standing. That said, this is how Section 3 was invoked against Couy Griffin.

Another argument that can be made is that, as this is an election matter, it is a decision to be made by the states under Article 1, Section 4.

It's a gray area and any state that attempts to bar Trump from the ballot will find themselves before the SCOTUS. There's a number of historical arguments the states can make for why Section 3 let's then bar someone from the ballot, while the are also a number of historical arguments for why Section 3 is toothless.

a reply to: Threadbare

And if the Supreme Court rules that there was no insurrection and Trump can run, how many buildings and cars will be burned down by the left?

Asking for an insurance company.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm guessing they kick it to Congress on grounds of Section 5 of the amendment stating:

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: tanstaafl

Section 3 makes no statements as to what triggers it. If we look at other parts of the Constitution the phrase "No person shall," implies that it auto-triggers once one takes part in acts of insurrection.

But that fact has to be established somehow, and the only way that can happen is in a court of law - as you and many others have plainly stated when it comes to claims of election fraud.

The courts have allowed private parties to ask for judges to issue a writ of quo warranto in the past. Although, most of those fail due to standing. That said, this is how Section 3 was invoked against Couy Griffin.

And I fully expect that to be overturned eventually.

Also, Quo Warranto only applies to current office holders, which Trump isn't.

Another argument that can be made is that, as this is an election matter, it is a decision to be made by the states under Article 1, Section 4.

It would still require the fact to be established, which, again, can only be done in a court of law.

It's a gray area

Have you ever heard of the 'void for vagueness' legal doctrine? That fully applies here.

and any state that attempts to bar Trump from the ballot will find themselves before the SCOTUS.

True enough, and they will straighten you out on this silliness.

a reply to: Threadbare

" I think the more traditional Conservatives and Constitutionalists have reached their breaking point with Trump."


So , you are a Conservatives and Constitutionalists Mind Reader Now , or just Suffer from a Acute Case of Wishful Thinking ?

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

When the largest & most influential Conservative legal group in the country is publishing papers saying Trump should be barred from the Presidency due to the 14th Amendment, it's not exactly hard to see which way the wind is blowing.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: network dude

I think it's a higher number than you're thinking. Between this lawsuit and the comments from the Federalist Society, I think the more traditional Conservatives and Constitutionalists have reached their breaking point with Trump.

you should bet all your money on Biden then. Believe in the bet.

I think if Trump is the nominee and he goes against Biden, he will win bigley.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

When the largest & most influential Conservative legal group in the country is publishing papers saying Trump should be barred from the Presidency due to the 14th Amendment, it's not exactly hard to see which way the wind is blowing.

can you point to when he was found guilty of sedition or overthrowing his government please? Because if he hasn't, and nobody has officially said we had an insurrection with unarmed idiots breaking windows and being bad until they were told to go home, then we didn't have an insurrection for Trump to be guilty of orchestrating.

But it is interesting to see a legal person not smart enough to grasp the most basic of rights granted to each person accused of a crime. Like DERP factor 9.

a reply to: Threadbare

The largest & most influential Conservative legal group? I don't care what they preach. If you ask most people they will not be able to answer either. 70k members. This would be like telling me I should listen to Liz Cheney or Mitt Romney for who I should vote for. Donald Trump did nothing to prevent him from running or holding office.

Why are all of you so scared for him to run?

originally posted by: matafuchs


Why are all of you so scared for him to run?

Because they are starting to realize the plan to bury him with indictments failed, and he will likely win.

a reply to: network dude

Nope, not scared.

It’s your side that’s scared and I find it quite

😂😂😂


You can see it here on ats 😂

And, yes, I have TDS and am quite proud it. Just like Tucker Carlson I hate him passionately and would love to never talk about him again. My hope is after next year we won’t have to. You know you’re looking forward to it too lol. Courage is not anyone’s strong point when it comes to Trump.

I bet your response will be derp, per usual.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

When the largest & most influential Conservative legal group in the country is publishing papers saying Trump should be barred from the Presidency due to the 14th Amendment, it's not exactly hard to see which way the wind is blowing.

It does Not Matter what the largest & most influential Conservative legal group in the country Think , the American People , All 330 MILLION of them , will make that Call . We Reside in a Democratic Republic Ruled by LAW and Not by the OPINION of Minority Groups.........

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: network dude

Nope, not scared.

It’s your side that’s scared and I find it quite

😂😂😂


You can see it here on ats 😂

And, yes, I have TDS and am quite proud it. Just like Tucker Carlson I hate him passionately and would love to never talk about him again. My hope is after next year we won’t have to. You know you’re looking forward to it too lol. Courage is not anyone’s strong point when it comes to Trump.

I bet your response will be derp, per usual.

I find it humorous that you and a few others here believe you will be on the winning team if Trump ends up completely destroyed. No one will be a winner, and like now, they will come for everyone else next. The people going after him are ignoring every law, and checks and balances are moot.

They are copying themselves like Agent Smith, and they won't be stopping when Trump is gone if they succeed.