Personally I don't think the fourteenth amendment actually applies. Since you would have to show evidence that trump actually had prior knowledge of and conspired with the planners of the attack.
The supreme court will likely base their decision on that, And not whether or not the fourteenth amendment applies to the president, Or whether or not states have the right to enforce it on their own.
The conservatives on the court wouldn't want to create President. That would make it harder to remove a democrat president later on.
In order to be guilty of insurrection, A person has to directly participate in, Or be complicit through prior knowledge of, a conspiracy to committ insurrection. I haven't seen any evidence that trump knew about the attack prior to it happening. The fact that his political rhetoric was the driving force behind the attack is irrelevant. His political rhetoric is technically protected under the first amendment. He had every legal right to question the Legitimacy of the election. Whatever other crimes he committed, Do not constitute insurrection. Interaction specifically means the use of violence to interfere with the legitimate function of government function of government. Is and to be guilty of interaction, One must participate in the conspiracy to perform that violence, Or half prior knowledge that it will take place.
Neither of those things have been proven. So I don't doubt that the supreme court will Overturn the colorado supreme court's ruling on those grounds.
That is not to say that an insurrection didn't take place, Because it did. But there's no evidence that trump was directly involved in planning the violence or had prior knowledge of it. And either of those things would be required for trump to actually be guilty of insurrection.
The supreme court will likely base their decision on that, And not whether or not the fourteenth amendment applies to the president, Or whether or not states have the right to enforce it on their own.
The conservatives on the court wouldn't want to create President. That would make it harder to remove a democrat president later on.
In order to be guilty of insurrection, A person has to directly participate in, Or be complicit through prior knowledge of, a conspiracy to committ insurrection. I haven't seen any evidence that trump knew about the attack prior to it happening. The fact that his political rhetoric was the driving force behind the attack is irrelevant. His political rhetoric is technically protected under the first amendment. He had every legal right to question the Legitimacy of the election. Whatever other crimes he committed, Do not constitute insurrection. Interaction specifically means the use of violence to interfere with the legitimate function of government function of government. Is and to be guilty of interaction, One must participate in the conspiracy to perform that violence, Or half prior knowledge that it will take place.
Neither of those things have been proven. So I don't doubt that the supreme court will Overturn the colorado supreme court's ruling on those grounds.
That is not to say that an insurrection didn't take place, Because it did. But there's no evidence that trump was directly involved in planning the violence or had prior knowledge of it. And either of those things would be required for trump to actually be guilty of insurrection.
