Michigan Supreme Court Hands Trump a Win

[rampart]

There is no cause for ineligibility, as it is an unenforceable clause. The only remedy remaining would be impeachment and removal. This is a non-issue invented by a bunch of two bit hacks.

unenforcable? the confederates were not allowed to serve as governor, were they?

 

[tahuyaman]

Why does Michigan fear facing Trump in an election?? Hmmm

I don’t believe they do.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They claimed Insurrection. Ok. I claim Whitmore was an Insurrectionist during BLM. Dont have to prove shit...just make shit up as we go.

How your side rolls....why not

You are not arguing rationally.

You're not living in the real world.

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.

 

[eagle1462010]

You are not arguing rationally.

You're not living in the real world.

I read the article. Group claims Insurrection. Where has he been convicted of it.

Your sides Chanting it all the time isnt a conviction. Kinda how you cult members roll huh?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The filing was an attempt to do that. Or did you miss that?

I'd ask you to please try and keep up, but I remember you.

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.
The Michigan Supreme Court did not address any questions arising under the U.S. Constitution. It did not rule on Trump’s claim that section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment requires federal implementing legislation; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that only Congress can decide presidential candidates’ qualifications; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that the president of the United States is not an “officer of the United States”; and it did not rule on any of various obscure legal theories raised by Trump’s supporters. It simply declined to overrule a lower court ruling that the Michigan state challenge process does not allow challenges to presidential candidates at the primary stage.

Free Speech For People Statement on Michigan Supreme Court Decision - Free Speech For People

Today, the Michigan Supreme Court issued a ruling in LaBrant v. Benson, the lawsuit brought by Free Speech For People and election lawyer Mark Brewer of Goodman Acker P.C. on behalf of a diverse group of Michigan voters who filed a legal challenge to Donald Trump’s candidacy. The lawsuit was...

freespeechforpeople.org

Consequently, it has no impact on Free Speech For People’s pending challenge in Oregon, or the status of the Colorado Supreme Court’s landmark decision ruling that Trump is disqualified under Section 3, or any other challenges FSFP plans to bring in other states. Nor does it preclude FSFP from raising the same claims in Michigan before the general election, if Trump’s candidacy proceeds to that point.

 

[eagle1462010]

You are not arguing rationally.

You're not living in the real world.

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.

Changes nothing in my argument. The group tried to do this saying Insurrection.

What Insurrection?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I read the article. Group claims Insurrection. Where has he been convicted of it.

Your sides Chanting it all the time isnt a conviction. Kinda how you cult members roll huh?

Reading and comprehension is an issue for you, I know. Hope this helps:

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.


The Michigan Supreme Court did not address any questions arising under the U.S. Constitution. It did not rule on Trump’s claim that section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment requires federal implementing legislation; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that only Congress can decide presidential candidates’ qualifications; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that the president of the United States is not an “officer of the United States”; and it did not rule on any of various obscure legal theories raised by Trump’s supporters. It simply declined to overrule a lower court ruling that the Michigan state challenge process does not allow challenges to presidential candidates at the primary stage.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Changes nothing in my argument. The group tried to do this saying Insurrection.

What Insurrection?

What is your argument?

You do not argue rationally.

You're not living in the real world.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

God loves Trump!

 

[drudge X]

Biden should be removed from 50 states for providing aid and comfort to the Hamas.

 

[eagle1462010]

I'd ask you to please try and keep up, but I remember you.

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.
The Michigan Supreme Court did not address any questions arising under the U.S. Constitution. It did not rule on Trump’s claim that section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment requires federal implementing legislation; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that only Congress can decide presidential candidates’ qualifications; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that the president of the United States is not an “officer of the United States”; and it did not rule on any of various obscure legal theories raised by Trump’s supporters. It simply declined to overrule a lower court ruling that the Michigan state challenge process does not allow challenges to presidential candidates at the primary stage.

Free Speech For People Statement on Michigan Supreme Court Decision - Free Speech For People

Today, the Michigan Supreme Court issued a ruling in LaBrant v. Benson, the lawsuit brought by Free Speech For People and election lawyer Mark Brewer of Goodman Acker P.C. on behalf of a diverse group of Michigan voters who filed a legal challenge to Donald Trump’s candidacy. The lawsuit was...

freespeechforpeople.org

Consequently, it has no impact on Free Speech For People’s pending challenge in Oregon, or the status of the Colorado Supreme Court’s landmark decision ruling that Trump is disqualified under Section 3, or any other challenges FSFP plans to bring in other states. Nor does it preclude FSFP from raising the same claims in Michigan before the general election, if Trump’s candidacy proceeds to that point.

LOL

Your proud states are trying to remove him from the ballot.

Will you spout Democracy next??

Your side is now attempting to remove political opponents using leftist judges.

Exactly why Trumps win was so important

 

[eagle1462010]

Biden should be removed from 50 states for providing aid and comfort to the Hamas.

Why not? Its true basically. Give them a taste of their own medicine

 

[eagle1462010]

Reading and comprehension is an issue for you, I know. Hope this helps:

The Michigan Supreme Court declined to review a ruling of the Michigan Court of Appeals that granted Trump’s request to stop the proceedings at the primary stage, as opposed to the general election. The lower court’s ruling was based on technicalities of Michigan state law regarding when challenges to presidential candidates’ qualifications may be filed. The court held that these challenges may not be filed before the primary–only afterwards.


The Michigan Supreme Court did not address any questions arising under the U.S. Constitution. It did not rule on Trump’s claim that section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment requires federal implementing legislation; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that only Congress can decide presidential candidates’ qualifications; it did not rule on Trump’s claim that the president of the United States is not an “officer of the United States”; and it did not rule on any of various obscure legal theories raised by Trump’s supporters. It simply declined to overrule a lower court ruling that the Michigan state challenge process does not allow challenges to presidential candidates at the primary stage.

My main argument stands

 

[drudge X]

LOL

Your proud states are trying to remove him from the ballot.

Will you spout Democracy next??

Your side is now attempting to remove political opponents using leftist judges.

Exactly why Trumps win was so important

Trump must win to preserve what's left of this country. Third World status for the US may be inevitable but he can slow the progress down to a trickle.

 

[Rawley]

Free Speech For People Statement on Michigan Supreme Court Decision - Free Speech For People

Today, the Michigan Supreme Court issued a ruling in LaBrant v. Benson, the lawsuit brought by Free Speech For People and election lawyer Mark Brewer of Goodman Acker P.C. on behalf of a diverse group of Michigan voters who filed a legal challenge to Donald Trump’s candidacy. The lawsuit was...

freespeechforpeople.org

The court - "simply declined to overrule a lower court ruling that the Michigan state challenge process does not allow challenges to presidential candidates at the primary stage."

Agreed

 

[Rawley]

Thas isn't what the case is about. stop regurgitating shit.

next

That's exactly what this case is about.

 

[eagle1462010]

What is your argument?

You do not argue rationally.

You're not living in the real world.

Im attacking the notion of Insurrection period. This case was another attempt to do so.

What Insurrection?

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

It must be so frustrating to watch none of these lame attempts to stop Trump work...

and they cause his poll numbers to skyrocket....lol

 

[drudge X]

If the SC allows CO's ruling to slide, Republicans need to toughen up and remove Biden from the states they controlled. There can be no compromise when Democrats gave the finger a free election.

 

[eagle1462010]

If the SC allows CO's ruling to slide, Republicans need to toughen up and remove Biden from the states they controlled. There can be no compromise when Democrats gave the finger a free election.

The left has shown their utter disrespect to laws and the republic.

We need a divorce