President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[BlueK]

The court has a lot of ways out of this one:

• They might say that there was no "insurrection" against the United States on Jan 6 so the 14th A does not apply to this situation.
• They might agree with two legal scholars that president is not an "officer of the United States"; the 14th A only talks about the senators and congressmen and "electors of the president", never specifically naming the president. The only hook for Trump would be as an "officer of the United States." The CO. supreme court rejected this argument that president is not "an officer of the United States," but the trial court judge accepted it.
• They could say that it WAS insurrection on Jan 6 and it DOES apply to the president but that the 14th amendment is not self executing; that is, that you have to have an applicable federal statute that applies to enforce the 14th amendment (there is no such statute currently).
• They could always reject it on a number of procedural/technical issues, but the speed with which the court is taking up the case suggests they won't do this.
• And they could say that it does bar Trump from office. I don't think this is likely. However, one clever way they could do this and not disrupt the election, is to say that the 14th Amendment doesn't bar Trump from appearing on ballots (after all, the constitution just says cannot "hold office"; nothing about "can't appear on the ballot"). This way Trump can still campaign/appear on the ballots/win states, but is forbidden from actually being president. I don't think the court will take this path either, but it would be really interesting: it would give Nikki a HUGE boost (why vote for a guy who can't accept the presidency) OR it would guarantee a revolt of the crazies once Trump is elected but judicially barred from holding the office.

As for votes, I think Thomas is a solid vote for Trump on anything. Roberts has super wary of Trump and the most likely to search for a way to get exclude him from office; I think he would actually vote to affirm the CO supreme court. All the other conservatives vote to reverse, I think, probably on self-executing grounds (so as never to have to say whether Jan 6 was an insurrection).

Agreed there are several off ramp opportunities here. I don't think very compelling though for any jurist trying to be objective or honest.The most ridiculous of all being the US president is not an officer of the US? It can't get more absurd than that. The idea that those who wrote this are saying it applies to almost everyone else, but not to a president who tried to break his oath by taking several illegal actions, including summoning a violent mob to attack Congress with the intent of preventing the transfer of power, just defies any concept of common sense.

These off ramps are all available for those who want an excuse. I actually believe at least 4 won't take them and I don't think it's as much of a stretch anymore that they can get at least one more of the others.

[Applejack]

Agreed there are several off ramp opportunities here. I don't think very compelling though for any jurist trying to be objective or honest.The most ridiculous of all being the US president is not an officer of the US? It can't get more absurd than that. The idea that those who wrote this are saying it applies to almost everyone else, but not to a president who tried to break his oath by taking several illegal actions, including summoning a violent mob to attack Congress with the intent of preventing the transfer of power, just defies any concept of common sense.

These off ramps are all available for those who want an excuse. I actually believe at least 4 won't take them and I don't think it's as much of a stretch anymore that they can get at least one more of the others.

But who? Amy or Kavanagh seem like the most likely, but I wouldn't bet my mortgage on either,

[BlueK]

But who? Amy or Kavanagh seem like the most likely, but I wouldn't bet my mortgage on either,

No, you're right it's still a longshot with those two for sure. I just don't think anymore that it's impossible.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I hate Trump with a passion, but I’m not so sure a SCOTUS ruling preventing him from running is the best thing in the long term. The best thing for the country is for him to get his ass kicked in the general election.

[falafel]

I hate Trump with a passion, but I’m not so sure a SCOTUS ruling preventing him from running is the best thing in the long term. The best thing for the country is for him to get his ass kicked in the general election.

100% agree. But do the Justices care? I'm sure they care about the country, but are they going to ignore what they think is the correct interpretation of Article 14 in order to protect the country?

[Jeff Lebowski]

100% agree. But do the Justices care? I'm sure they care about the country, but are they going to ignore what they think is the correct interpretation of Article 14 in order to protect the country?

Unlike many here, I can't even begin to predict how the court will rule. Including Thomas.

[BlueK]

Unlike many here, I can't even begin to predict how the court will rule. Including Thomas.

I haven't made a prediction. I just said I think it's not necessarily a slam dunk that they rule in Trump's favor.

[Applejack]

Unlike many here, I can't even begin to predict how the court will rule. Including Thomas.

You can't even begin to predict a thomas decision? Seems like he's given a lot of indications which way he leans on this.

[Applejack]

I haven't made a prediction. I just said I think it's not necessarily a slam dunk that they rule in Trump's favor.

I think how Thomas votes on excluding trump from the presidency is a slam dunk.

[frank ryan]

Thomas is the activist judge conservatives feared a liberal would become. It's easy to predict how he rules.

[BlueK]

I hate Trump with a passion, but I’m not so sure a SCOTUS ruling preventing him from running is the best thing in the long term. The best thing for the country is for him to get his ass kicked in the general election.

He'll likely be baaaaaaack every election until he dies even if the Republicans dump him eventually. But then they guarantee themselves to lose if Trump's cult goes with him.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Can we all stop pretending that this is a black and white legal issue? Lots of blue states have looked at this and decided to not to pursue this response.

[falafel]

Can we all stop pretending that this is a black and white legal issue? Lots of blue states have looked at this and decided to not to pursue this response.

In fact, only 2 out of like 15 states have ruled in favor of it. Colorado and Maine. Everyone else rejected it.

[BlueK]

Can we all stop pretending that this is a black and white legal issue? Lots of blue states have looked at this and decided to not to pursue this response.

Most likely for perceived practical reasons and not black and white legal ones. But then liberals in blue states are not usually those who profess to be strict Constitutional originalists like so many on the Supreme Court do. That's what makes this fascinating in a way.

[Applejack]

This 14th amendment challenge is far from a slam dunk. There are lots of ways the court might decide it doesn't apply (see my first post). Lots of states have said it doesn't apply to trump, and even the Colorado district judge found that as well. There just haven't been cases before that provide any sort of precedent.

but I DO know how Thomas will vote.