Arguing the Trump insurrection ballot case before the Supreme Court
By HatetheSwamp January 1, 2024 2:11 pm Category: Law (0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
po and Curt, former clerks at the US Supreme Court, can splain this better than I, no doubt. But, I'll do my best.
When attorneys argue a case before the Court, they have to be prepared to use all the time allotted to them to make their case but, for all practical purposes, that never happens. Any justice can interrupt with a question at any time. Often the first interruption comes in the opening seconds...and the prepared argument is over.
So, for those of you who think that Trump can be kept off the presidential ballot because of his involvement in the J6 riot, imagine...
You're the attorney. You prepare your argument. Ten seconds in, Clarence Thomas interjects with the question,
"What did Mr Trump's do that constitutes involvement in an insurrection that could disqualify him from serving as President?"
What do you say to win the day?
OD and pb are clear in arguing why they think there's nuthin in the Fourteenth Amendment that could be used as a justification for preventing Trump from serving a second term.
So far as I know, all you who practice TrumpHate say is that Trump's bad and that individual state judges and bureaucrats should be able to type out the I word and kill his campaign...at their whim.
So. Whadaya say to Justice Thomas that'd convince him... and Alito, and Kavanagh, and Barrett, and Roberts?...or, enough of them to win your case?
The future of American, uh, democracy, baha, is in your hands!
Comments Start Below
The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Arguing the Trump insurrection ballot case before the Supreme Court ":
Be the first to comment on this article.
Comment on: "Arguing the Trump insurrection ballot case before the Supreme Court "
