... I'm starting to get a bubbling of glee!

If that's a thing.

Mark this post.

Put effort into winning instead.

Roberts' corrupt court is NOT our friend

If it's anything other than 9-0

The last thing they want to see is a criminal defendant of 4 indictments, with (a minimum of) 91 criminal counts, a total ignorant-of-the-laws and of the Constitution, one who thinks he is above the law while he behaves like a stupid (but dangerous) mob boss, elected as POTUS to destroy the Constitution and proclaim himself dictator for life with a violent vengeance in mind (re: the insurrection).

Letting him skate would be like a total rendition of THEIR powers to the eventual executive branch the crazy con man who's leading a crazy, violent ignorant cult of personality could occupy again.

8-1. We know who the 1 could be.

Any Justice would have to rule in his favor.

that only state legislatures can keep somebody off the ballot.

But that any such legislative measure would be an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

A perfect paradox preventing it.

Seems, once again, that there is a chasm between the authority of the states and that of the federal government. I think only Switzerland has achieved a long-lasting government with these differences. And they've had their problems, too.

I also believe Neil Katyal, who obviously agrees with him and has extensive experience arguing cases before the SCOTUS.

I'd believe either one of them, let alone both of them put together!

in real time.

rather than 50 state nullification of his candidacy. OTOH, another entity might just appeal one of these two state's decisions for him, and force a SCOTUS decision, anyway, which in the end would keep Trump from ever running for any high office. No matter the SCOTUS plaintiffs, millions would then put forward any Republican who'd still promise to do what Trump said he'd do to democratic government. But millions more would GOTV and beat them down.

The general election's gonna get tense, either way.

I have the feeling that the Electoral College is going to screw up the Popular Vote again.

Keep in mind that that's why the party has fanned out to five battlegrounds.

It's always been meaningless. We fixate on it way too much for something so meaningless.

That's also why national polls are meaningless.

The only things that matters are battleground states and how they impact the Electoral College. The rest of it is pointless to obsess over, but obsess over it we most certainly do.

If don’t think we will ever see popular vote. It would totally take away the reason for our constitution.

and to see Neal Katyal's expression of true appreciation and respect for the most excellent old judge.

Sometimes, it's the little things that slip into the news that can bring it all back to a human level and remind us that knowledge, skill, values, virtue, human relationships and earned respect really do matter.

You're gonna love the look on Kaytal's face. Like the beloved son soaking up a father's righteous praise.

🥺

Not “if” it happens, but “WHEN” it happens.

You're nailed it: "WHEN" is the key.

It's possible that SCOTUS would decide in 2024 before its recess, maybe before party conventions in July and August, so that states will have to go with nominees that don't include Trump. Let's hope!

The court will rule almost immediately.

This won't go through the usual SCotUS schedule.

election, very unlikely.

Watch when the video comes out. He's very, very explicit about Trump's violation, and the 14th, Sec 3 will come up when even one these state rulings gets appealed.

At least as I understood him. He didn't focus on the "insurrection" parts, but on violations against the Constitution and the specific wording within Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. (Would need to see the interview again to be more concise. He may be considered a conservative, but what a brilliant mind.)

Some of them are convicted of it and they have said Trump told them to do it. He sent them down the street! He said he was going too.

So if he aided and abetted he is out.

He certainly aided them by sitting in a dining room for three hours watching it on TV when ANY other president would have sent extra help to the capitol police asap.

An accusation isn’t enough. A conviction would be needed.

it is not only a crime to try to overthrow the Constitution, it is disqualifying.

Before this clip posted, Luttig talked about the 14th Amendment prohibiting acts that are against the Constitution, not against the USA or the people of the USA. Which clearly is why the Supremes are the ones to decide. Constitutional questions are to be decided by the 9.

From the ballot but hard to imagine a majority of the sitting legal eagles actually banning him.

Seems obvious that any State disqualifying Trump would result in a SC review. insurrection is a Federal crime, but you’d be relying on 50 different judgements of fact as to whether it happened.

And WHEN the SC throws the ruling out, he’ll claim that Biden and the Democrats were anti-Democratic by trying to keep him off the ballot.

that the violation is against the constitution, not against the United States. It wasn't the riot, it was the refusal to accept the results. watch the discussion. it was really good.

SOMEONE in the election or judicial process at the State level has to decide that he violated the Constitution. That is a State ruling in facts, not law. And different States ruling on facts in the Federal Constiturion isn’t going to be successful.

I'm not sure. There is a point (made in post #8) that Trump might not appeal such a decision, on the basis that it could be better for him to lose ballot presence in one state than to risk losing all fifty.

Katyal and Luttig both agree that any one of the three states deciding will end up in the SCOTUS. The Constitution must be upheld.

within local jurisdictions. They knew who had fought the Union.

Strict constructionists notwithstanding, I'm sure we'll handle it differently today.

I don't think the USSC is Donald Trump's friend, anyway. There is a tendency for DUers to panic when cases go before them because they are so corrupt and have such a definite agenda, but their agenda is not the same as DJT's or the fascists in the Legislature that hope to take control of the government. They have ruled pretty consistently against GOP efforts to gerrymander and limit the vote. They are far more concerned with their social/religious agenda, but empowering Donald Trump doesn't help that in the least, and arguably hinders it.

-- Mal

IMO he engaged in "rebellion" even if somebody decides it doesn't meet their legal standard for "insurrection."

OED:
rebellion
n noun
1 armed resistance to an established government or ruler.
2 defiance of authority or control.

Besides, it quite clearly refers to the first entry.

They didn't have firearms. They were arguably armed, as described in the link below. But would the court accept this interpretation of what "armed" means in its applicability to whether this was, from a legal constitutional perspective, an armed insurrection?

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

In favor of Trump.

Same thing: Disqualifying a traitor from elected office is set in Constitutional stone.

We need to stop acting like what’s right is an impossible dream.

The why of this amendment being left intact was to a reason. I think it clearly would open up the constitutionality of other amendments, specifically the 2nd. We shall see. It has already passed muster in the appeals courts.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/couy-griffin-january-6-new-mexico-judge-14th-amendment/

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/

until such a time as his crimes have been proven in court. I understand that that does not conform with the meaning of the 14th. I don't want mistakes made that can come back and bite us in the butt. If Joe Biden can not beat Trump in the next election, then we will deserve Trump and the end of Democracy has we have know it. That should be an incentive to pull out all of the stops to defeat Trump and to do it bigly.

Watch the video.

due process. Don't get me wrong, if it were only applied to Trump, I would take it and dance in the streets with the result, but I believe that it was set a dangerous precedent. If Trump is not defeated at the polls again we Wall never be done with Trumpism. But, hey, I am a plumber, not a constitutional scholar.

against the US Constitution. Luttig said that Trump directly violated the 14th Sec 3 by a) very refusal to accept the proven loss of the election, and b) that he gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists. Those are the facts; 14A Sec 3 is the law, case closed. There is also a precedent ruling from event of Jan 6 -- NM used proof that Couy Griffin gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists, so the 14A Sec 3 in 2021 ruling that he couldn't run ever again for office in NM. IIRC, it wasn't appealed. But these states' rulings will be all the way to SCOTUS.

I saw this interview. Luttig and Neal Katyal are a good team. There is no way for the SCOTUS not to take a case where TFG has been banned from one state ballot. There will be some ruling that will either allow TFG to run in all states or disqualify TFG from all ballots. I have a feeling that Katyal and Luttig will be filing some briefs in this case and I would love to see Katyal argue this case