• @TootSweet
    link
    English
    246 months ago

    …unless SCOTUS overturns it.

    • Drusas
      link
      fedilink
      326 months ago

      How can SCOTUS even have jurisdiction when the Constitution specifically gives the power to oversee elections to the States? This seems more like it should require Congress to change the Constitution if the federal government wants the power to supersede the decision of the Supreme Court of Colorado.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        196 months ago

        States are allowed to make their own rules but they aren’t allowed to contradict the US Constitution. Since the US Constitution is subject to the political leanings of the current court, who tf knows what’s ever going to happen.

        • Drusas
          link
          fedilink
          166 months ago

          I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but they are following the Constitution in making this decision. The Constitution does not require a conviction.

          • @TootSweet
            link
            English
            46 months ago

            I mean, three of the SCOTUS were appointed by the guy who tried to coup the U.S. government and a fourth is married to someone who also tried to coup the U.S. government. I don’t think it’s so much about whether the arguments why they “can’t” overturn it are good arguments or not at this point. It’s like telling a pidgeon to stop shitting on the chess board because shitting on the board is not a legal move in chess.

        • @Madison420
          link
          -16 months ago

          It has no constitutional implication aside from the state constitution. The supreme court can’t touch that issue.

    • @andrewta
      link
      86 months ago

      Not sure why you got down voted.

    • @Madison420
      link
      06 months ago

      They can’t, that’s not how the Supreme Court works.

      • @TootSweet
        link
        English
        36 months ago

        Reuters:

        The Colorado Supreme Court paused its own ruling pending review by the U.S. Supreme Court, which Trump said he will immediately seek.

        NPR

        Justin Levitt, a constitutional law professor at Loyola Law School, told NPR that as long as there’s a petition for U.S. Supreme Court review in place by Jan. 5, there’s a “99.9%” chance that Trump will remain on the Colorado primary ballot.

        AP

        The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case.

        If a) Trump seeks review, b) SCOTUS agrees to take up the case, c) SCOTUS overturns Colorado’s Supreme Court’s ruling, and d) all that happens in time, then Trump will appear on the Colorado ballot.

        • @Madison420
          link
          06 months ago

          That’s a pause to see if the court will take it which they can’t.

          • @TootSweet
            link
            English
            26 months ago

            The U.S. Supreme Court “can’t” take up the case in the same sense as Trump “can’t” incite his base to storm the capital building. But that didn’t stop him.

            And as I’ve said elsewhere in this thread, we’ve got three Trump appointees on the SCOTUS plus a guy whose wife took part in the January 6 rally and endorsed the attack on the capitol.

            I hope you’re right (and I’m not saying there’s a 0% chance it won’t get overturned – not that it’s going to make a difference whether Trump wins the general election in 2024 either way) but I fear we’re living in a world where “can’t” doesn’t necessarily mean “won’t” and where the U.S. Supreme Court may be totally willing to flout the rules.