Hypothetically speaking, what if Don is prevented from being on the ballot in a yet to be determined number of states.........

[berg80]

The only states that would get away with that are the blue states, which he wouldn’t win anyway.

If a swing state tried to get away with depriving their voters from selecting the man they want as president, there would be outrage. They’d never get away with it.

Yes, there would be outrage. Misdirected outrage at people enforcing the 14th A rather than at Trump for orchestrating a failed coup.

 

[DBA]

......but wins the POT nomination?

New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

A good government group spearheading a national effort to bar Donald Trump from the election next year moved to remove him from the ballot in Michigan, citing the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause.

It’s the first such action in a major swing state from a group with the know-how and resources to present a legitimate argument.

The petition, filed in Michigan’s Court of Claims, asks the court to make a finding that Trump’s efforts to reverse his loss in the 2020 election render him ineligible for office under the Disqualification Clause. The group is also asking the court to block Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) from placing Trump the Republican primary ballot.

Free Speech for People, the non-profit which filed the suit, asked the Minnesota Supreme Court earlier this month to ban Trump from the ballot there as well.

It’s part of a national strategy to use the 14th Amendment’s Reconstruction-era ban on those who engaged in insurrection from holding office to block Trump from the 2024 ballot. Free Speech for People and CREW are, so far, the two main groups undertaking the effort. CREW filed suit in state court in Colorado this month seeking the same outcome there.
New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

To be honest, I had lost track of how many states have suits to remove the Orange fraud from the ballot. So I Googled it.

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot​

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot - Washington Examiner

At least six states are facing pushes from both Democrats and conservatives who are seeking to keep former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot by disqualifying him under the 14th Amendment. Election officials in Alaska, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Rhode Island all...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Despite what the headline says there are more than 6.

Perhaps the most salient question is what judicial body has jurisdiction over state ballots? Each state's Supreme Court or the SCOTUS. If the answer is the former, it's theoretically possible for Trump's name to be excluded from ballots in.......let's say a half dozen states.........but listed on the other 44. Obviously voters could write in his name but that does not address the complicated issue of his disqualification to be the prez in the aforementioned 6 states.

This..............

The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.

Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

.........gives Congress ultimate control over congressional elections but does not mention elections for the prez and VP.

Any thoughts?

These states wouldn’t do this even if they could. It is so in your face that it may wake up a few of the brain dead that are currently to dense to see that the elections are already compromised. It would make more sense for them to come out and say someting to the effect that it would not be fair to have Trump on the ballot and would be detrimental to Democracy, followed by their normal modus operandi on election night which will “find” the votes they need for Biden to win, and of course, continue to push the there is not significant voter fraud narrative. This would give some Democratic voters the warm fuzzies, actually believing that their party gives a hoot about Democracy and/or election security.

 

[Mashmont]

Putting your paranoid false equivalence aside, this is the matter at hand.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

See, that's where the Marxist radicals and their gullible followers are lying. There was no "insurrection". Insurrections are where armed people are trying to overthrow the government and install their own. The protesters following the election on that day were UNARMED. They were understandably outraged by the stolen election. You people can't possibly be dumb enough to believe this was anything equivalent to the violent armed overthrow of governments like we see in third-world countries.

 

[Lisa558]

Yes, there would be outrage. Misdirected outrage at people enforcing the 14th A rather than at Trump for orchestrating a failed coup.

Except that isn’t what happened - that’s the Dems‘ lie about it in order to take him down.

 

[Lisa558]

See, that's where the Marxist radicals and their gullible followers are lying. There was no "insurrection". Insurrections are where armed people are trying to overthrow the government and install their own. The protesters following the election on that day were UNARMED. They were understandably outraged by the stolen election. You people can't possibly be dumb enough to believe this was anything equivalent to the violent armed overthrow of governments like we see in third-world countries.

And not only was there no insurrection, Trump discouraged the riot.

 

[berg80]

Except that isn’t what happened - that’s the Dems‘ lie about it in order to take him down.

The documentary and testimonial evidence of his guilt is overwhelming.

 

[DBA]

Putting your paranoid false equivalence aside, this is the matter at hand.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

If conviction is not necessary, then I am sure we can find plenty of things that would disqualify Biden, according to the 14th Amendment, from being on the ballot. This is quite a slippery slope. If it happened, and it won’t, these states would be putting their electoral votes in jeopardy as the Federal Supreme Court would likely have something to say about it. Don’t count the swing states and ole’ Joe would be in trouble for sure.

 

[berg80]

These states wouldn’t do this even if they could. It is so in your face that it may wake up a few of the brain dead that are currently to dense to see that the elections are already compromised.

Please take your debunked conspiracy theories to the badlands.

 

[berg80]

If conviction is not necessary, then I am sure we can find plenty of things that would disqualify Biden, according to the 14th Amendment, from being on the ballot.

Like all citizens you are free to file a suit in your state to have Biden disqualified. Good luck with that.

 

[DBA]

Like all citizens you are free to file a suit in your state to have Biden disqualified. Good luck with that.

The difference is that my state would not do that because we recognize the dangers to Democracy in making such a move, despite not agreeing with his policies. Democrats have no such fears. Win baby win at all costs. Don’t worry, at the rate they are allowing anybody and everybody to walk across the Southern border, they may not have to try to disqualify opposing candidates in the future or fudge the vote counts. This is their ultimate goal.

 

[Nostra]

......but wins the POT nomination?

New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

A good government group spearheading a national effort to bar Donald Trump from the election next year moved to remove him from the ballot in Michigan, citing the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause.

It’s the first such action in a major swing state from a group with the know-how and resources to present a legitimate argument.

The petition, filed in Michigan’s Court of Claims, asks the court to make a finding that Trump’s efforts to reverse his loss in the 2020 election render him ineligible for office under the Disqualification Clause. The group is also asking the court to block Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) from placing Trump the Republican primary ballot.

Free Speech for People, the non-profit which filed the suit, asked the Minnesota Supreme Court earlier this month to ban Trump from the ballot there as well.

It’s part of a national strategy to use the 14th Amendment’s Reconstruction-era ban on those who engaged in insurrection from holding office to block Trump from the 2024 ballot. Free Speech for People and CREW are, so far, the two main groups undertaking the effort. CREW filed suit in state court in Colorado this month seeking the same outcome there.
New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

To be honest, I had lost track of how many states have suits to remove the Orange fraud from the ballot. So I Googled it.

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot​

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot - Washington Examiner

At least six states are facing pushes from both Democrats and conservatives who are seeking to keep former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot by disqualifying him under the 14th Amendment. Election officials in Alaska, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Rhode Island all...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Despite what the headline says there are more than 6.

Perhaps the most salient question is what judicial body has jurisdiction over state ballots? Each state's Supreme Court or the SCOTUS. If the answer is the former, it's theoretically possible for Trump's name to be excluded from ballots in.......let's say a half dozen states.........but listed on the other 44. Obviously voters could write in his name but that does not address the complicated issue of his disqualification to be the prez in the aforementioned 6 states.

This..............

The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.

Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

.........gives Congress ultimate control over congressional elections but does not mention elections for the prez and VP.

Any thoughts?

You and six states sound scared.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

......but wins the POT nomination?

New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

A good government group spearheading a national effort to bar Donald Trump from the election next year moved to remove him from the ballot in Michigan, citing the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause.

It’s the first such action in a major swing state from a group with the know-how and resources to present a legitimate argument.

The petition, filed in Michigan’s Court of Claims, asks the court to make a finding that Trump’s efforts to reverse his loss in the 2020 election render him ineligible for office under the Disqualification Clause. The group is also asking the court to block Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) from placing Trump the Republican primary ballot.

Free Speech for People, the non-profit which filed the suit, asked the Minnesota Supreme Court earlier this month to ban Trump from the ballot there as well.

It’s part of a national strategy to use the 14th Amendment’s Reconstruction-era ban on those who engaged in insurrection from holding office to block Trump from the 2024 ballot. Free Speech for People and CREW are, so far, the two main groups undertaking the effort. CREW filed suit in state court in Colorado this month seeking the same outcome there.
New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

To be honest, I had lost track of how many states have suits to remove the Orange fraud from the ballot. So I Googled it.

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot​

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot - Washington Examiner

At least six states are facing pushes from both Democrats and conservatives who are seeking to keep former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot by disqualifying him under the 14th Amendment. Election officials in Alaska, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Rhode Island all...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Despite what the headline says there are more than 6.

Perhaps the most salient question is what judicial body has jurisdiction over state ballots? Each state's Supreme Court or the SCOTUS. If the answer is the former, it's theoretically possible for Trump's name to be excluded from ballots in.......let's say a half dozen states.........but listed on the other 44. Obviously voters could write in his name but that does not address the complicated issue of his disqualification to be the prez in the aforementioned 6 states.

This..............

The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.

Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

.........gives Congress ultimate control over congressional elections but does not mention elections for the prez and VP.

Any thoughts?

I'm curious what Born in Kenya Barack has to say about this

 

[Moonglow]

See, that's where the Marxist radicals and their gullible followers are lying. There was no "insurrection". Insurrections are where armed people are trying to overthrow the government and install their own. The protesters following the election on that day were UNARMED. They were understandably outraged by the stolen election. You people can't possibly be dumb enough to believe this was anything equivalent to the violent armed overthrow of governments like we see in third-world countries.

You must be fricvkin' blind in one eye and can't see out of the other.

 

[Moonglow]

I'm curious what Born in Kenya Barack has to say about this

He wasn't born in Kenya

 

[petro]

Take him off the ballot and watch the largest write in of a candidate to ever happen in history.

 

[j-mac]

......but wins the POT nomination?

New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

A good government group spearheading a national effort to bar Donald Trump from the election next year moved to remove him from the ballot in Michigan, citing the Constitution’s Disqualification Clause.

It’s the first such action in a major swing state from a group with the know-how and resources to present a legitimate argument.

The petition, filed in Michigan’s Court of Claims, asks the court to make a finding that Trump’s efforts to reverse his loss in the 2020 election render him ineligible for office under the Disqualification Clause. The group is also asking the court to block Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D) from placing Trump the Republican primary ballot.

Free Speech for People, the non-profit which filed the suit, asked the Minnesota Supreme Court earlier this month to ban Trump from the ballot there as well.

It’s part of a national strategy to use the 14th Amendment’s Reconstruction-era ban on those who engaged in insurrection from holding office to block Trump from the 2024 ballot. Free Speech for People and CREW are, so far, the two main groups undertaking the effort. CREW filed suit in state court in Colorado this month seeking the same outcome there.
New Disqualification Clause Case Filed Against Trump In Michigan

To be honest, I had lost track of how many states have suits to remove the Orange fraud from the ballot. So I Googled it.

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot​

Six states facing push to keep Donald Trump off 2024 ballot - Washington Examiner

At least six states are facing pushes from both Democrats and conservatives who are seeking to keep former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot by disqualifying him under the 14th Amendment. Election officials in Alaska, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Rhode Island all...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Despite what the headline says there are more than 6.

Perhaps the most salient question is what judicial body has jurisdiction over state ballots? Each state's Supreme Court or the SCOTUS. If the answer is the former, it's theoretically possible for Trump's name to be excluded from ballots in.......let's say a half dozen states.........but listed on the other 44. Obviously voters could write in his name but that does not address the complicated issue of his disqualification to be the prez in the aforementioned 6 states.

This..............

The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.

Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed. The Framers of the Constitution were concerned that states might establish unfair election procedures or attempt to undermine the national government by refusing to hold elections for Congress. They empowered Congress to step in and regulate such elections as a self-defense mechanism.

Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center

Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholars

constitutioncenter.org

.........gives Congress ultimate control over congressional elections but does not mention elections for the prez and VP.

Any thoughts?

My thought is that it sounds like you are desperate to exclude Trump....And are willing to violate the Constitution to do it....sad.

 

[berg80]

The difference is that my state would not do that because we recognize the dangers to Democracy in making such a move

There is a danger to democracy in not making such a move. Like not following the constitutional order. There is a reason clause 3 of the 14th A was ratified. It's to protect the country from traitors like Trump who is a threat to the republic.

 

[berg80]

My thought is that it sounds like you are desperate to exclude Trump....And are willing to violate the Constitution to do it....sad.

You have conflated violating the constitution with enforcing its provisions...sad.

 

[berg80]

Take him off the ballot and watch the largest write in of a candidate to ever happen in history.

I think that's right. But would a constitutional crisis ensue if he had been disqualified as a candidate in half a dozen states?

 

[j-mac]

You have conflated violating the constitution with enforcing its provisions...sad.

And you are so blinded by hatred for Trump, that you'll jump at any chance to suppress the voters rights to vote for him.