• OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t want him to be president again and I don’t think he will be, but this just isn’t the case, and you’re not going to get a favorable SCOTUS decision on it. It’s an interesting idea to write a law school paper about, not a real legal theory.

    • qisope@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yep, unfortunately the only thing that matters is the current SCOTUS interpretation of the Constitution.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        At the end of the day, most Supreme Courts would be extremely reluctant to disqualify someone and would prefer to leave it to the voters. I think even an extremely liberal court would rule the same unless they were just being nakedly political the way the conservative Justices seem to.

        Trump needs to be defeated soundly at the voting booth. There won’t be any easy resolutions where he and his fanatics just quietly disappear.

        • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          46
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          He’s already been defeated soundly at the voting booth. That’s why there was an insurrection.

          We really should be moving to consequences part of the constitution instead giving Trump yet another chance to steal power.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            This is just an acknowledgement that voting is maybe our most sacred right and even a very liberal court is going to be extremely reluctant to rule that the majority of the country can’t vote for who they want. My (layman’s) understanding is that there is enough room to argue that any court would just leave it to the voters.

            Frankly, I don’t care because the whole republican party is an existential threat to the nation so it’s not like I’ll breathe a sigh of relief if it’s DeSantis instead.

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It seems like a conviction would very much help to prove what trump did. Otherwise it’s just accusations.

    • jayrhacker@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, we really don’t want state election officials individually determining who’s qualified and who’s not…

  • Arthur_Leywin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Trump Supporter: “What insurrection? We were fighting for freedom and Jan 06 was a peaceful protest so the rule doesn’t apply”

  • Xariphon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    11 months ago

    Watch the “party of the Constitution” completely ignore that with no consequences.

    Domestic terror cult that they are.