Latest Breaking News

NYC Liberal

(20,136 posts) Mon Mar 4, 2024, 11:04 AM Mar 4

Supreme Court rules Trump cannot be kicked off Colorado ballot [View all]

Source: NBC

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday overturned a Colorado court ruling that said former President Donald Trump was ineligible to run for office again because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol -- bringing a swift end to a case with huge implications for the 2024 election.

The court reversed the Colorado Supreme Court, which determined that Trump could not serve again as president under a provision of the Constitution's 14th Amendment.

The decision comes just a day before the Colorado primary.

In addition to ensuring that Trump remains on the ballot in Colorado, the decision is likely to affect similar cases that have arisen. So far only two other states, Maine and Illinois, have followed Colorado's path. Like the Colorado ruling, both those decisions were put on hold.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-trump-cannot-kicked-colorado-ballot-rcna132291

Text of the opinion (PDF)

139 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court rules Trump cannot be kicked off Colorado ballot [View all] NYC Liberal Mar 4 OP

No surprise at all from a bought & paid for SC. machoneman Mar 4 #1

Even the liberals? TwilightZone Mar 4 #3

That's what I expected Fiendish Thingy Mar 4 #8

☝️☝️☝️☝️ PortTack Mar 4 #65

Keep in mind, it might be easier for us to beat Trump in November than some GOP dark horse Attilatheblond Mar 4 #13

100000% this. I'm sure I'll get flamed, but I would rather shithead be on the ballot. toesonthenose Mar 4 #23

No flaming here. TwilightZone Mar 4 #28

Agree, not having a conviction was very detrimental to the case. toesonthenose Mar 4 #37

That might be true EndlessWire Mar 4 #103

They upheld their interpretation of the Constitution. TwilightZone Mar 4 #107

I agree, except for the real danger FoxNewsSucks Mar 4 #34

all pawns of bdamomma Mar 4 #50

That will be attempted no matter WHO the GOP runs at the top of the ballot Attilatheblond Mar 4 #73

No flaming. Because of the media's bias toward generating shareholder profits as opposed to truth in PatrickforB Mar 4 #48

I doubt you'll get flamed..... COL Mustard Mar 4 #126

Beating Trump in November was always the only realistic solution. TwilightZone Mar 4 #25

What did Sotomayor, Kagen, and Brown Jackson receive in payment? Jose Garcia Mar 4 #49

Actually I would blame the ones that wrote that Amendment more than the Court. cstanleytech Mar 4 #122

The MOMFUDSKI Mar 4 #2

It was 9-0 Polybius Mar 4 #33

Are you calling the liberals on the court bastards as well? totodeinhere Mar 4 #99

Supreme Court keeps Trump on ballot, rejects Colorado voter challenge mahatmakanejeeves Mar 4 #4

All dealt with in a timely manner BeyondGeography Mar 4 #5

Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson: dalton99a Mar 4 #6

That's what I'm saying...that another similar case with different plaintiffs or in a November election wiggs Mar 4 #14

Attention: dems and Jack wiggs Mar 4 #22

Far too late for that FBaggins Mar 4 #32

YES!!! Charge Trump now! creeksneakers2 Mar 5 #131

No text of the ruling? Fiendish Thingy Mar 4 #7

Link (PDF): NYC Liberal Mar 4 #9

Thank you bdamomma Mar 4 #16

Nothing melm00se Mar 4 #26

It was 9-0 they all voted the same way Fullduplexxx Mar 4 #15

Great News! So now let's get Charles Manson on the Ballot ! msfiddlestix Mar 4 #10

Charles Manson was, at one time, an embryo, so I believe he can correctly be considered a person. mahatmakanejeeves Mar 4 #77

Nevertheless, I wonder if the controversy causes some low information voters to cast votes for wiggs Mar 4 #11

She's ahead of the curve, again wiggs Mar 4 #21

No, it's time to put this to rest Polybius Mar 4 #39

In what world is a 9-0 decision questionable? MichMan Mar 4 #63

Unquestioned by all 9 scotus justices: He engaged in insurrection. He is an oath-taking officer subject to wiggs Mar 4 #84

Not a single justice said that he engaged in insurrection FBaggins Mar 4 #86

Many are saying otherwise, that leaving lower court findings of insurrection in place is wiggs Mar 4 #93

Many are smoking something FBaggins Mar 4 #97

The finding of a State Court Zeitghost Mar 4 #101

Nope creeksneakers2 Mar 5 #132

They didn't say he isn't an insurrectionist. They didn't say it wasn't an insurrection Novara Mar 4 #12

So the SC really bdamomma Mar 4 #18

The question addressed was not whether he was an insurrectionist; it was whether Colorado had the right... thesquanderer Mar 4 #80

My question ... AncientOfDays Mar 4 #111

John H. Christy (State of Georgia) was elected to the US House of Representatives in 1868. After the Georgia Governor 24601 Mar 4 #116

re: "on what basis did they make that determination. I have yet to see a satisfactory answer to that." thesquanderer Mar 4 #117

Maybe I'm old and blind, AncientOfDays Mar 10 #139

They didn't say that states can remove representative/senators from the ballot FBaggins Mar 4 #120

Here is what they said Mistwell Mar 4 #113

So can the Colorado Court bdamomma Mar 4 #19

Nope Polybius Mar 4 #43

so this does not apply either???? bdamomma Mar 4 #55

If he's ever convicted of an insurrection Polybius Mar 4 #61

nt bdamomma Mar 4 #62

Hell, i actually believe TFG DID say he wants to get rid of our constituion. bluestarone Mar 4 #72

My reading of 14-3 is Mr. Evil Mar 4 #85

more and more discussion and analysis about this. Could be consequential wiggs Mar 4 #94

i expected this... tfg has yet been found guilty of a t/reason.. samnsara Mar 4 #17

Based on the text of the opinion, a conviction wouldn't matter Shrek Mar 4 #20

That's what I don't like. For president, Congress means impeachment. LeftInTX Mar 4 #35

Not at all FBaggins Mar 4 #42

What would the vote have to be? Polybius Mar 4 #44

If we're talking about passing legislation, that's simple majority. thesquanderer Mar 4 #81

I think they're saying that enforcement is up to Congress and not the STATES. n/t thesquanderer Mar 4 #74

Elections are run by states. NOT congress. onecaliberal Mar 4 #88

Elections are run by states, but WITHIN the constitutional federal parameters. thesquanderer Mar 4 #92

That conflicting states argument is nonsense. creeksneakers2 Mar 5 #133

That's a good counterpoint. There is no constitutional requirement for a candidate to be on the ballot in all states, thesquanderer Mar 5 #135

I agree creeksneakers2 Mar 6 #138

That would work Zeitghost Mar 4 #38

Where is he being charged with treason? MichMan Mar 4 #96

He hasn't been charged with treason. TwilightZone Mar 4 #119

This ruling DownriverDem Mar 4 #24

Exactly how Hitler slowly gained more and more power. It didn't happen overnight. Bengus81 Mar 4 #27

Is anybody really supposed to moniss Mar 4 #29

First you'd have to find a Dem candidate who tried to overthrow the government. n/t thesquanderer Mar 4 #83

Nope FBaggins Mar 4 #87

States run elections ignore scotus Fullduplexxx Mar 4 #30

Of course sarge43 Mar 4 #31

Rather hypocritical of them bdamomma Mar 4 #57

The title misspelled "Rapist" FoxNewsSucks Mar 4 #36

So let's just RocRizzo55 Mar 4 #40

So in essence, they ruled that states don't have the authority WestMichRad Mar 4 #41

The 14th amendment, article #3 had it clear as can be. Botany Mar 4 #45

The question was whether an individual state has the authority to make that determination. thesquanderer Mar 4 #89

I agree with the ruling Traildogbob Mar 4 #46

not shocking (NT) berksdem Mar 4 #47

Laurence Tribe said it was a slam dunk MichMan Mar 4 #51

And it was FBaggins Mar 4 #69

Tribe may be a brilliant mind but his partisan bias has gotten to the point where he can no longer be relied upon as an Midwestern Democrat Mar 5 #134

I was pretty sure it would go this way. patphil Mar 4 #52

Damn onetexan Mar 4 #53

I can see the point Deep State Witch Mar 4 #54

Fascists gonna be fascists. lark Mar 4 #56

not going to do this bdamomma Mar 4 #59

But the vote was 9-0 Polybius Mar 4 #67

It's not about that part, it's about legislating when none is needed to make it easier to cause an inserrection lark Mar 5 #137

Use this as the argument for dissolving the electoral college Condescenturion Mar 4 #58

I'm shocked I tell you shocked! kimbutgar Mar 4 #60

Couy Griffin, who's been banned from elected office duhneece Mar 4 #64

Maybe the liberal justices are playing the long game Bayard Mar 4 #66

Anybody surprised, nope. republianmushroom Mar 4 #68

Ok, I get it. Up to a point SpankMe Mar 4 #70

The ballot question had to come before super Tuesday because that is when Colorado has its primary ripcord Mar 4 #123

Guess the state by state votes will show how many traitors there are in each state Marthe48 Mar 4 #71

No Excuses, E. Normus Mar 4 #75

*Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson -- expressed frustration elleng Mar 4 #76

What I take home is EndlessWire Mar 4 #100

Or Maybe... Zeitghost Mar 4 #102

Or maybe EndlessWire Mar 4 #104

I don't think you understand the concurrance Zeitghost Mar 4 #106

This will make even MORE Dems to Get out the vote. Blue wave coming. flying_wahini Mar 4 #78

*Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson -- expressed frustration elleng Mar 4 #79

So, play the tape forward Novara Mar 4 #82

Couldn't your hypothetical scenario also be defined as an insurrection? MichMan Mar 4 #95

Maybe? Zeitghost Mar 4 #98

"The lower court's findings that he did participate in an insurrection is still in force" - that's incorrect FBaggins Mar 4 #109

Of course they did. AllyCat Mar 4 #90

I sense an impending kickage of trump's ass this election cycle. Torchlight Mar 4 #91

We the people of Colorado and everywhere else there are sane voters... Trust_Reality Mar 4 #105

Wow. jimfields33 Mar 5 #136

They are saying states don't have the power to keep someone off the ballot nuxvomica Mar 4 #108

There has always been a fucking patchwork. Some states do the whole fucking thing by mail. Some fucking don't. SoFlaBro Mar 4 #110

Funny how none of the leaders of the Confederacy were convicted of insurrection Mysterian Mar 4 #112

Yeah, Congress didn't make any special laws Farmer-Rick Mar 4 #118

They didn't? FBaggins Mar 4 #124

The 1870 enforcement act was to protect Farmer-Rick Mar 4 #128

Yes... Wikipedia is handy - but that isn't all that it did FBaggins Mar 4 #129

Interesting Layzeebeaver Mar 4 #114

This ruling is 100% wrong nakocal Mar 4 #115

Sucks but hardly surprising as I suspected it was going to be a overturned. cstanleytech Mar 4 #121

Where is Merrick Garland? CONN Mar 4 #125

If congress can REMOVE the ban on taking office as an insurrectionist then that implies that someone ELSE deemed him Blues Heron Mar 4 #127

Congress is specifically given the power of enforcement Zeitghost Mar 5 #130