SCOTUS should rule unanimously that Constitution matters more than defeating Trump at any cost ..By

[mystery-ak]

 SCOTUS should rule unanimously that Constitution matters more than defeating Trump at any cost
By Social Links for Jonathan Turley
Published Dec. 20, 2023, 1:42 p.m. ET

The Colorado decision to bar Donald Trump from the ballot will be overturned because it is wrong on the history and the language of the 14th Amendment.

Dead wrong.

The question is whether the US Supreme Court will speak with one voice, including the three liberal justices.

As with the three Democratic state justices who refused to sign off on the Colorado opinion, these federal justices can now bring a moment of unity not just for the court but the country in rejecting this shockingly anti-democratic theory.

For years, the disqualification theory has been treated like some abstract parlor game for law professors.

While Democrats called for the disqualification of 120 House members, it was treated as a fringe theory.

It has now lost its charm as a legal brain teaser.

As I have previously written, the disqualification of Trump is based on the use of a long-dormant provision in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

After the Civil War, House members were outraged to see Alexander Stephens, the Confederate vice president, seeking to take the oath with an array of other former Confederate senators and military officers.

They had all previously taken the same oath and then violated it to join a secession movement that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

That was a true rebellion.

January 6, 2021, was a riot.

more
https://nypost.com/2023/12/20/opinion/scotus-should-rule-constitution-matters-more-than-defeating-trump-at-any-cost/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

100% correct.

[LMAO]

The MSNBC commentators  are all happy about this decision

But I went over to Democrat Underground after donning my MOPP 4 gear and the feelings are surprisingly mixed

Didn't they try this with MTG?

[DefiantMassRINO]

The SCOTUS ruling will be a punt or a legal balancing act the like of which the country has never seen.

My personal feeling is Trump's name should remain on the ballot as he as not been convicted of sedition.

There are many open questoins about Presidential qualifications enumerated in the Constitution and its amendments.

Who rules that a Presidential candidate is too young, and who enforces it?
Who rules that a Presidential candidate is not a "natural born" citizen, and who enforces it?
Who rules that a Presidential candidate has received foreign emoluments, and enfroces it?
Who rules that a Presidential candidate has participated in sedition, and who enforces it?

The requiremens are in the United States Constitution and its amendments.
There are no Federal ballots nor Federal elecitons.
There are state ballots and state elections.
Each candidate needs to solicit each state to have his name appear on the (state) ballot.
So, it appears that ballots and elections are implemented by states.

I'm really interested to see how the SCOTUS ruling walks the Federalist tightrope.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

In every single area of the law, a case that cites to federal law as the bases for the cause of action and or decision automatically gives the Supreme Court ultimate appellate jurisdiction.  The Colorado Supreme Court expressly stated that it was relying upon the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution in reaching its decision. That makes it a case appealable to the US Supreme Court.

One of the justifications for that was mentioned by one of the dissenters from that Colorado Supreme Court decision. He noted the possibility that different courts would have different interpretations of federal law, and so a federal requirement would be applied differently by different courts throughout the country. Because the federal court has a legitimate interest in ensuring that federal law is applied uniformly, federal courts ultimately have jurisdiction over this case.

There are other grounds on which jurisdiction is proper, but that one is the simplest.