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

3 points

Get fucked, Cheeto Mussolini.

permalink
report
reply
14 points

Maybe if this happens in enough states, it’ll compell the Supreme Court to rule favorably.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

It fucking sucks that politics steers the decisions of the highest court in the land, but that’s where we are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
72 points

Seriously. We ALL SAW it on Jan 6! Dude wrecked our countries record of peaceful transition all because he threw a bitch ass tantrum. Thanks, jerk.

permalink
report
reply
56 points

If anyone’s arguing the other way… Where was the national guard? An angry mob attacked our highest ranking politicians at the nations capital and it was less defended than your average Walmart on Black Friday. In the end Pence had to call them in despite Trump watching the entire thing unfold on live TV.

It was an orchestrated attempted coup, full stop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Just like the USAF standdown order

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I really wish that he wasn’t stopped from attending it like he wanted too, this would be such an open and shut thing if otherwise. Now the courts are all hung up on if he participated or not. He obviously fucking caused it but you know, due process and all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m thankful he didn’t attend. His sycophants would likely have gone much further with their GodKing present, egging them on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Silver lining, he could have gotten shot sticking his head through a window

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yea, honestly, in the overall picture of things I am too, because who knows what would have actually happened if things had been taken further with him there like you said. But just for this scenario where it went as far as it did - the court is now hung up on technicalities, it would be a different conversation if he had.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
1 point

they do tend to get upset when the law is applied equally without fear or favor, yeah

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

The Constitution doesn’t give the deciding power to the SCOTUS, it requires a 3/4 vote of Congress to resolve this.

It’s completely unconstitutional for the SCOTUS to be making the final decision. They should be the ones penalizing any state that doesn’t remove him from the ballot for violating the Constitution.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

So it’s liberals for “states’ rights”, like in “Firefly” and SW Prequels?

(Not American, so you may consider this joke dumb.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Am american, not sure what you’re trying to say here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

scotus decides what the constitution means, though. and they’ll decide it doesn’t mean this, because they’re openly corrupt, bought and paid for with receipts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

That would only hold true if Donald trump was officially convicted of the crime of insurrection. A crime which so far he hasn’t even been charged with. Until he is charged tried and convicted of insurrection the 14th amendment isnt applicable here and I’d bet my money that’s exactly what the surpreme court is going to rule on.

If they are serious about wanting to remove him from the vallt then they should start there. By trying him for insurrection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Let us know where the wording of the 14th requires a conviction. He’s being judged in COURTS by the state supreme courts. You are creating hurdles that simply aren’t present.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

constitution says absolutely zero about conviction, and 14th has been invoked in the past against people without convictions. but you’re right, scotus will ignore both the constitution and precedent because they’ve been hand selected to grant the presidency to the traitor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

The 14th doesn’t require a conviction. It was written in the wake of the civil war, to prevent confederates from holding office without needing to convict them.

The union didn’t want to have to drag every confederate to court just to keep them out of office, because the union knew it would be impossible for the courts to handle and would run counter to reunification efforts. But they were afraid that the confederates would attempt to seize power via the elections once it became clear that the insurrection had failed. So they wanted a way to preemptively bar any former confederate from running for office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I bet Zengen is right though. I bet if SCOTUS hears the case the majority opinion will pretend that a conviction is a necessary requirement to use the 14th amendment, even though it obviously isn’t.

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.


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

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 469K

    Comments