Clarence Thomas Blows Up Colorado Lawyer’s Argument for Kicking President Trump Off the State’s Ballot and Leaves Him Stumped

[Billiejeens]

Does not matter.
The SCOTUS ruling obviously was correct.
No one should be interfering with candidates at all, but states are the least authorized to dictate federal elections.
The whole point of the 14th amendment was to severely limit state authority.
To somehow claim the 14th allows states to bias federal candidates, is incredibly absurd.

there has been no ruling.
though it is obviously going to be 9-0 or 8-1 with the wise Latina dissenting.

 

[Meister]

The lawless thugs got bitch slapped, just as I predicted. This is why the Trump SCOTUS was his greatest achievement!

I don't think that the liberal Justices were too impressed with Colorado's finest lawyers either.

 

[BS Filter]

Explain what you find so profound about Thomas’s question

The kid got his ass kicked.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

But when Thomas got the opportunity to question Murray, the lawyer’s argument completely fell apart. When Thomas asked for specific examples of states disqualifying national candidates, Murray could not provide one despite being given multiple opportunities. The stumped lawyer then finally admits he does not have one.

Maybe because in over 200 years, no President had ever sent a mob to overturn an election

And still hasn't.
Try again... we all know you don't believe that yourself.
You only serve to entertain by taking these positions.

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

Joe Biden, the guy who beat your orange douchebag so badly

Biden won through fraud. He's not a president. He's a Usurper.

 

[Zincwarrior]

How was his wife involved in the CO case, please be specific.

.

Treason via staging an election Q. His wife should be a Defendant.

 

[tahuyaman]

What it comes down to is Congress failed to disallow Trump as a future candidate after Jan 6 due to political partisanship

Now, some states are taking Jan 6 seriously

There’s no legal justification to keep him off a ballot. You don’t have to vote for him.

 

[eagle7-31]

LMAO!!!

Especially @ "DC RINOs"!!!

You people are blind as bats.

That means so much coming from a looney left two faced troll like yourself. LOL

 

[Rigby5]

...And only traitors would vote for the orange criminal.

I disagree.
I do not like Trump, but nothing he did was remotely criminal.
Which means the only actual insurrection was by those trying to prosecute Trump for things that were not illegal.

 

[OKTexas]

Treason via staging an election Q. His wife should be a Defendant.

Once again, what does that have to do with the CO case?

.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Once again, what does that have to do with the CO case?

.

Everything.

 

[Rigby5]

Explain what you find so profound about Thomas’s question

The general way the SCOTUS rules is based on maintaining existing precedent.
So it was very appropriate for Thomas to ask for precedent for states using the 14th to block candidates.

But the reality is that most southern politicians were re-elected, and only a few were banned by Congress, not by states.

No state has ever before tried to block anyone from the ballot, (other than by age, citizenship, etc.).

 

[Crepitus]

Poor creepy.

Only in your imagination, kiddo.

 

[OKTexas]

Everything.

Wrong again commie, the CO case deals specifically if a State can unilaterally remove a national candidate from the ballot for any reason the State determines is justified. From the questioning from the justices from all sides of the ideological spectrums, I think CO will lose 9-0. BTW, I haven't changed that number from day one.

.

 

[Crepitus]

Meaning of course that SCOTUS can only be right when you like it's ruling.

Nope.

Nice try though.

 

[Crepitus]

Does not matter.
The SCOTUS ruling obviously was correct.
No one should be interfering with candidates at all, but states are the least authorized to dictate federal elections.
The whole point of the 14th amendment was to severely limit state authority.
To somehow claim the 14th allows states to bias federal candidates, is incredibly absurd.

They haven't ruled yet.

 

[Crepitus]

That means so much coming from a looney left two faced troll like yourself. LOL

Gonna hafta disagree with "two faced".

 

[Zincwarrior]

Wrong again commie, the CO case deals specifically if a State can unilaterally remove a national candidate from the ballot for any reason the State determines is justified. From the questioning from the justices from all sides of the ideological spectrums, I think CO will lose 9-0. BTW, I haven't changed that number from day one.

.

Remove them for insurrection. His traitor wife helped that insurrection
.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Nope.

Nice try though.

I am absolutely correct with that observation. The only good SCOTUS decision is one you agree with.
Stop lying.

 

[Crepitus]

I am absolutely correct with that observation. The only good SCOTUS decision is one you agree with.
Stop lying.

Nope.