• @sunbrrnslapper
      link
      108 months ago

      Doesn’t that put the 14th and 5th in conflict? I made the assumption that due process (5th) was assumed/required when the 14th was written.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        being disqualified from an office is not covered by the 5th amendment

        people under 35 are not being held out of office of the president for some crime.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s a civil matter, not a criminal one.

        Requiring congress to vote to not allow him to run is legally the same as requiring congress to vote to not let allow a 5 year old to run. Neither Trump nor the 5 year old should have to be proven ineligible They’re simply not, under the law as written.

        SCOTUS are a bunch of political hacks and they should be charged with aiding and abetting an insurrectionist.

    • @hydrospanner
      link
      -28 months ago

      So… what’s to stop a Texas or a Mississippi or a Florida from deciding that Biden has participated in an insurrection, and requiring no conviction, uses this as grounds for removal from the ballot in November?

      As much as I want Trump off ballots and believe he’s an insurrectionist, it’s important to remember that anything that can be done to hamper his chances that requires no (or a low bar) legal framework can also be done to help his chances.

      If a court in Colorado can sit down and decide he’s off the ballot because of their opinions, and that decision is enforceable and unassailable, then we’re establishing that a state court can strike any name from any ballot because they say so.

      With that precedent, I would fully expect states with GOP leadership to appoint judges who would then find reasons to call some aspect of Biden’s presidency an insurrection (in a similar vein as the Mayorkas impeachment), and remove him from their state’s ballot.

      • @thesporkeffect
        link
        28 months ago

        Literally nothing. If they were able to they would do it already, in several cases they are kind of half-assedly trying. Mutually assured destruction isn’t the principle of operation when one side is generally acting in good faith and the other side is actively pulling the copper out of the walls.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          48 months ago

          The thing keeping them from doing that is they need some form of proof.

          Nothing is stopping anyone from just lying about everything, except other people who refuse to go along with the lie. All social systems are inherently backed by community intolerance of dishonesty.