Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

The silent Trump voter
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 28, 2024 7:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [27 views]

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (12 comments) [447 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [137 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [53 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [110 views]

Trump, Giuliani, Meadows are unindicted co-conspirators in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 4:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [65 views]

Turley: The "haymaker" in Supreme Court arguments. Chief Justice Roberts. "Openly mocking of DC Circuit."
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 5:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (8 comments) [194 views]

The latest general election polls from this weekend reveal something interesting.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 22, 2024 11:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (10 comments) [424 views]

So Ukraine got money.
Military by oldedude     April 24, 2024 3:58 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (6 comments) [99 views]

Donna may be getting her wish granted: Gateway Pundit to file for bankruptcy
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:28 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [39 views]

History selectors, pages, etc.
Supreme Court will take up Trump’s eligibility to run for president
By Ponderer
January 5, 2024 5:15 pm
Category: History

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)


Plunging into a political minefield, the Supreme Court has agreed to take up a case challenging Donald Trump’s eligibility to run for president.

The court agreed Friday to consider whether states have the power to disqualify Trump from the ballot due to his attempts to upend the 2020 election and his role in stoking the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In a brief order on the eve of the three-year anniversary of the Jan. 6 attack, the high court indicated it will review a Colorado Supreme Court decision that found Trump ineligible to run under a provision of the 14th Amendment that strips insurrectionists of the ability to hold U.S. government posts.

The justices announced an accelerated timetable to hear the extraordinary election dispute, setting oral arguments for Feb. 8.

Cited and related links:

  1. politico.com

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 "Supreme Court will take up Trump’s eligibility to run for president":

  1. by Ponderer on January 5, 2024 5:15 pm

    Cool!

  2. by Ponderer on January 5, 2024 5:20 pm

    It appears that the SC will be determining what Section 3 of the 14th Amendment actually means. One way or the other. If they say that it means what it says, then they will likely be ruling the Trump cannot hold the office of president even if he is elected.

    Cool!

  3. by oldedude on January 5, 2024 6:36 pm
    If they read the whole amendment, trumpster is in good shape.

  4. by HatetheSwamp on January 6, 2024 1:05 am

    It's going to take some fancy footwork to convince the Justices that doing nuthin for 187 minutes constitutes leading an insurrection.

  5. by islander on January 6, 2024 6:15 am

    As much as I’d like to see Trump removed from the ballot, I’d rather see him soundly defeated and drag his enablers in congress down with him in the upcoming election.

    In a Federal election, I doubt the courts will allow individual states to ban a candidate from running in their particular state. The unintended consequences could be horrific.

  6. by Ponderer on January 6, 2024 7:07 am

    Isle, it's likely that the SC will want to kick this constitutional can down the road federally.

    What they really need to and should do is make a flat-out determination whether the 14th Amendment means what is says and whether someone who has engaged in insurrection against the Constitution is eligible to hold the office of president or not. Making what the states do about their ballots moot or not. Even if states allow someone who engaged in insurrection on their ballots and he ends up winning, a simple and obvious reading of Sec 3 of the 14th declares him ineligible to "hold the office" he was otherwise elected to.

    But what I bet they will do is keep it to this one situation with states and their ballots and determine constitutionally that states can put any unqualified candidate they want to on the ballot or not. Thereby kicking the can down the road until theshit hits the fan if he wins and there is no legal way to seat him because he is not qualified to hold the office. That ought to go over well with the MAGA crowd.

    I hope that's not what they do. But I bet it is.


  7. by HatetheSwamp on January 6, 2024 7:47 am

    What they really need to and should do is make a flat-out determination whether the 14th Amendment means what is says and whether someone who has engaged in insurrection against the Constitution is eligible to hold the office of president or not.

    Are you aware of ANYONE, on either side, who is arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment has no meaning at all in prohibiting people who have engaged in insurrection from running from the offices mentioned in Section 3?

  8. by Ponderer on January 6, 2024 9:06 am

    "If they read the whole amendment, trumpster is in good shape." -olde dude

    olde dude, you are apparently arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment has no meaning at all in prohibiting people who have engaged in insurrection from running from the offices mentioned in Section 3, and that you expect the Supreme Court to find likewise.


  9. by oldedude on January 6, 2024 11:34 am
    olde dude, you are apparently arguing that the Fourteenth Amendment has no meaning at all in prohibiting people who have engaged in insurrection from running from the offices mentioned in Section 3, and that you expect the Supreme Court to find likewise.
    Noooooo..... and how can you make such bullshit up? WHEN SCOTUS gets asked this question knowing what we know now. CO has violated Due process. The law is very specific about that as I've pointed out over 20 times now. IF he gets his due process, it's the flip of a coin (I don't make odds on court cases). In court, he can lawfully defend himself. He can call witnesses. He can cross examine his accusers.

    The one piece you completely avoid is DUE PROCESS. You can't legally take away someone's rights without DUE PROCESS. I saw you at a crime scene. Without questioning you, or even interviewing you, I put you in prison. That's the same thing you're doing to trumpster. We're both taking away rights without DUE PROCESS.

  10. by Indy! on January 6, 2024 2:02 pm

    May I propose a new amendment for the board - I call it "Dude process". All the amendment says is Old Dude cannot say the words "due process" in more than two consecutive posts. If he does - he's given a two day timeout where he can't post anything that includes the words "due process".

    Think about it, Curt - I think it's a winner. 😌



    Isle - the problem with you theory is nobody in our weak ass gov't is going to kick an elected president out of office after the election.

  11. by oldedude on January 6, 2024 4:31 pm
    You need to check with po. She STILL doesn't understand DUE PROCESS. It sickens me the most.

Go To Top

Comment on: "Supreme Court will take up Trump’s eligibility to run for president"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page