Not saying they wouldn't, but being so sure is a bit much.Pending SCOTUS ruling, which will obviously overturn this decision
Basically making this a moot point
Not saying they wouldn't, but being so sure is a bit much.Pending SCOTUS ruling, which will obviously overturn this decision
Basically making this a moot point
I hope people realize the implications of this statement.Supreme court overturn of this decision seems likely in a court where 3 justices were appointed by Trump, and 6 were appointed by other Republican presidents.
That bidens 2024 means he can rule like a kingI hope people realize the implications of this statement.
Well yes, that too. But I was thinking more along the lines of the implications regarding a SCOTUS where the rulings depend on who appointed the justices and their party affiliations.That bidens 2024 means he can rule like a king
I'm sorry, I thought it was a given that SCOTUS has become a partisan political entityWell yes, that too. But I was thinking more along the lines of the implications regarding a SCOTUS where the rulings depend on who appointed the justices and their party affiliations.
And if the 14th amendment isn't applicable then the whole case is moot, so it's actually extremely likelyUnlikely, since the appeal made by trump lawyers does not dispute he was an insurrectionist but only the appicability of §14
Fine, then we will see next year.And if the 14th amendment isn't applicable then the whole case is moot, so it's actually extremely likely
It's a meeting of members of the Republican party in the state, reps for different candidates make a case, then party members voteSo... Call me stupid, but what does 'hold caucus' mean?
The article describes it as a way to allow people to still vote for the insurrection inciter regardless, but other than that I've got no idea what it's about. So... Halp?
True. It is pretty shortsighted for them, if they rule that the President, even an ex one, can't be touched.That bidens 2024 means he can rule like a king
Okay... So how does this action impact the election in the slightest?It's a meeting of members of the Republican party in the state, reps for different candidates make a case, then party members vote
The one with the most votes gets the state delegates
It has nothing to do with state government and is run by the party, so the government can't tell them who they can and can't vote for
I like a typical primary which is state run and funded
It's a meeting of members of the Republican party in the state, reps for different candidates make a case, then party members vote
The one with the most votes gets the state delegates
It has nothing to do with state government and is run by the party, so the government can't tell them who they can and can't vote for
I like a typical primary which is state run and funded
Any US election has two partsOkay... So how does this action impact the election in the slightest?
I mean... I guess I can start a one person party, hold a caucus, and have my pay members(me) get me the highest votes. As such, i award myself some 'state delegates', hold another caucus for the heck of it and get some more of those because I can.
But surely it's not like this stuff impact my actual chances to win in the actual state to begin with... Right?
Generally there are state laws in place that allow major parties to automatically appear on ballots - sometimes tied to performance in past electionsIf a party can arbitrarily choose their candidate, what is preventing the state from ignoring the party's submissions for the election?
Generally there are state laws in place that allow major parties to automatically appear on ballots - sometimes tied to performance in past elections
The libertarian party in Indiana for instance appears on the ballot every year because they reached the minimum required percentage of votes for secretary of state in the previous election
And the libertarian party can pick whoever they want - any sort of primary elections are at the goodwill of the party - but ultimately they don't have to do any primary
Same for R, D and other smaller parties
If you start a new party and manage to get enough votes you can start nominating whoever you want too. I mean, smaller US parties aren't even in every state
Right, the state chooses which parties have ballot accessTo be clear, it's the state that has the choice, not the fed?
So I question the jurisdiction that the SCOTUS would have in forcing Trump to be on the ballot.Right, the state chooses which parties have ballot access
Typically the laws are pretty restrictive and tend to favor the major two parties and restrict third party ballot access as much as possible
The effort 3rd parties have to go through to get simple ballot access is insane
They can't force him to be on the ballot, but they can strike down the Colorado opinion that Trump is barred from running for office under the 14th amendmentSo I question the jurisdiction that the SCOTUS would have in forcing Trump to be on the ballot.