Four of the nine justices - its three liberal members and its newest member - disagreed with the rest of the court about decision, saying the outcome powered by five conservative justices went further than necessary.

It ruled that barring state enforcement avoids a “patchwork” of candidates being declared ineligible in some states but not others. On that point all the justices agreed.

But liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, as well as conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in separate opinions faulted the other five justices for going further to specify that Section 3 can be enforced only through federal legislation. Given the profound partisan divisions in Congress, any such legislation is highly unlikely.

(George Mason University constitutional law professor) Ilya Somin said he was disappointed the justices did not delve into tricky questions that the Colorado Supreme Court tackled, including its conclusion that the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack was an insurrection and that Trump took part.

  • BombOmOm
    link
    English
    4
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Exactly. It is critical to consider any power and what happens when that power falls into the hands of your most hated opponent. Anything that gives the government more power or restricts the rights of the people should be highly questioned.

    • @RaoulDook
      link
      English
      44 months ago

      Anything that gives the government more power or restricts the rights of the people should be highly questioned.

      🥇 Lemmy Gold award