Maine barred Donald Trump from the primary ballot Thursday, making it the second state in the country to block the former president from running again under a part of the Constitution that prevents insurrectionists from holding office.

The decision by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) is sure to be appealed. The Colorado Supreme Court last week found Trump could not appear on the ballot in that state, and the Colorado Republican Party has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. The nation’s high court could resolve for all states whether Trump can run again.

Archive

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
155 points

Royal also argued that Trump violated Section 3, while Gordon’s challenge took a different tack, arguing that Trump is not eligible to be on the ballot because he claims to have won the 2020 election, which would have been his second term. The 22nd Amendment states that no person shall be elected to the office of president more than twice.

The other arguments are Colorado redux

permalink
report
reply
118 points

arguing that Trump is not eligible to be on the ballot because he claims to have won the 2020 election, which would have been his second term. The 22nd Amendment states that no person shall be elected to the office of president more than twice.

Oh thats clever!

“The 14th Amendment Constitution says you, an insurrectionist, cannot be on the ballot”

Trump: “I’m not an insurrectionist! I was defending my election to office in 2020!”

"Ah, okay then so you’re admitting that you’re trying to run for a 3rd term in violation of the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points

Clever, but no. He didn’t get a second term, and his whining in a corner doesn’t change that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

But for him to publicly admit that… it might snap a few people out of the illusion.

…I hope.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh that’s clever!

It’s obviously childish as fuck to be playing such twisted logic games with something as important as the Presidency. Clever is not a word I want applied to American jurisprudence

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Obviously they’re not operating in good faith, so they’ll come up with some nonsense justification as to why president loser deserves a 3rd term or something anyway. But that’s still a novel approach.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Do you really believe, in your heart of hearts, that someone deciding to bar Trump based on this “third term” argument is acting in good faith?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Why wouldn’t they be? Just because a premise is farcical doesn’t mean you can’t accept it for the sake of argument.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

arguing that Trump is not eligible to be on the ballot because he claims to have won the 2020 election

mondo big LOLs there. It’s not likely to hold water in court, imo, and I’m guessing that the argument will be that he never took the oath for the second term. Buuut it might mean Trump is either going to have to admit to the court that he didn’t win or he’s going to be told by the SCOTUS that he didn’t. Get dunked on, idiot.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 511K

    Comments