The case raises a novel legal question under a constitutional clause that prohibits those who have "engaged in insurrection" from serving in the federal government.
The justices will review a decision by the Colorado Supreme Court that said Trump could be barred from the Republican primary ballot in that state, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruling is likely to have national repercussions, potentially setting guidelines that would determine how every other state would handle the issue.
The brief order said the case would be argued on an accelerated schedule on Feb. 8, indicating that a ruling will follow soon after.
"There is also the possibility that if Trump is kicked off the ballot, Republicans could take retaliatory action by doing the same to President Joe Biden. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has already floated such a move."
I wonder that excuse they'll dream up to try to pull this off.
The one I've heard floated is not securing the border to their satisfaction somehow constitutes insurrection and since a lot of people have argued there doesn't have to be any conviction or factual determination by a court it would stick just as well as the Jan 6th stuff against Trump.
It's a bad argument to consider not enforcing the law, but it's not an incorrect statement. Republicans responded to the impeachment of Trump by continously trying to impeach Biden. They're responding to the insurrection by pointing at things dems do and yelling insurrection.
It's dumb and incorrect, but it's pretty effective at diluting the seriousness of those particular actions to their own voter base. You could argue that that's the point.
The only thing I have heard is that anyone who supported the BLM movement during the rioting is essentially supporting anti american values thus insurrection. I have heard this from a few separate places.
If democrats were split 4-3 on the ruling in Colorado, what outcome are people realistically expecting getting this from a group of mostly conservative judges?
If they don't let him through then democrats will stay in power and the threat to their billionaire bribes "donations" will be at risk. They might get some serious changes to how the judicial arm works that dilutes their nearly absolute power.
If they DO let him through then republicans will continue to rally for pro conservative policies that dismantle democracy in place of a single party system where the judges are still on top and get to do effectively whatever they want, so long as they keep letting their side win.
The Colorado case might be ruled to allow Trump's name to be there, but the Maine case might let the state court's decision stand if it were to come to the SCOTUS, the Secretary of State is doing things by the book following Maine election laws.
SCOTUS is irrelevant now for Colorado. Today was the deadline to certify primary ballots, and the state Supreme Court issued a stay to their ruling pending SCOTUS. Since they didn’t decline the case and haven’t made a ruling, his name is allowed on the ballot.
Review? Alito won't even read the thing, Roberts will make sure it is narrowly tailored to only get the result he wants, Thomas has already gotten a new boat and can't be bothered, and The Rapist will be too hung over to sign his own name. The only one "reviewing" is the clerical staff of Roberts.
Nobody want's Trump disqualified more than Republicans. Many of whom hate his guts but are too chickenshit to challenge him publicly. A SCOTUS ruling against him would be the perfect solution. He would be forced out as the de facto leader of the party and all the crazies would blame Democrats and John Roberts.
If the fix is in, that's bad news for Trump.
That being said, my opinion is that if the only way to stop Trump is to disqualify him, then this stupid country isn't worth saving and the goddamn constitution doesn't matter anyhow.
He’s already been certified on the ballot in Colorado though, so the court very well may likely just argue that it’s moot now and kick it down the road.