Supreme Court Gives Colorado Crazy Secretary of State Jenna Griswold Just 10 Minutes Next Week to Argue Her Case to Remove Trump from Colorado Ballot

[MAGA Macho Man]

Her attempt will be futile! Every state challenged so far has kept Trump on the ballot. Colorado will be no different.

Supreme Court Gives Colorado's Crazy Secretary of State Jenna Griswold 10 Minutes Next Week to Argue Her Case to Remove Trump from Colorado Ballot | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

The Supreme Court on Friday announced they were giving crazy Jenna Griswold 10 minutes to argue her case that President Trump should not be on the ballot in Colorado for the primary or general election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[shockedcanadian]

Another late Griswold Christmas. Bah-hum bug!

 

[Independentthinker]

Her attempt will be futile! Every state challenged so far has kept Trump on the ballot. Colorado will be no different.

Supreme Court Gives Colorado's Crazy Secretary of State Jenna Griswold 10 Minutes Next Week to Argue Her Case to Remove Trump from Colorado Ballot | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

The Supreme Court on Friday announced they were giving crazy Jenna Griswold 10 minutes to argue her case that President Trump should not be on the ballot in Colorado for the primary or general election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Well, to be fair, she doesn't even really need 10 whole minutes to spout nonsense. They are giving her more time than she deserves.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Well, to be fair, she doesn't even really need 10 whole minutes to spout nonsense. They are giving her more time than she deserves.

Should be cute seeing her try to convince a wall full of people nominated to SCOTUS by Trump that he shouldn't be on the ballot again.

 

[Independentthinker]

Should be cute seeing her try to convince a wall full of people nominated to SCOTUS by Trump that he shouldn't be on the ballot again.

It will actually be more interesting to see if any of the three liberal justices will agree to this nonsense. Even liberal states who wanted to keep Trump off the ballot ultimately decided that they can't.

 

[Rambunctious]

Keep tossing hardballs at Trump libtards and he will keep hitting them out of the park....

 

[buckeye]

Well, to be fair, she doesn't even really need 10 whole minutes to spout nonsense. They are giving her more time than she deserves.

My guess is they have a minimum for cases they accept.

 

[Blackrook]

Ten minutes is a generous amount of time to entertain a fool.

 

[BackAgain]

Why would the Secretary of State in Colorado be allowed to address the Court?

It wasn’t her dumbass ruling. Doesn’t Colorado have lawyers for the State?

 

[Winston]

Should be cute seeing her try to convince a wall full of people nominated to SCOTUS by Trump that he shouldn't be on the ballot again.

Nope, what is going to be "cute" is if those so-called "originalist" judges don't support Colorado's decision, if not outright disqualify Trump nationwide, and with a 9-0 decision.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/299107/20240129171610494_23-719_Amici%20Brief.pdf

The above is an absolutely devastating Amicus Brief. Brilliantly constructed, it corners the so-called "originalist" of the SCOTUS. SOP for the current conservative cohort of the SCOTUS is to pretend to be originalist, and to seek historical references to rationalize their decisions. The overturning of Rowe a glaring case in point. Alito writes excessively about the historical banning of abortions, but he begins that history in the middle of the 19th century, long after all the founders were dead and gone. A true "originalist" renders legal decisions based on the understanding of legal matters by the framers, at the time the Constitution was ratified, the end of the 18th century.

In this case, we are talking about the understanding of legal matters by those jurists, and Congressional representatives, that were in office at the time of the ratification of the 14th amendment, and therein lies the brilliance of the above Amicus Brief. It documents quotations from the Congressional debate over the 14th amendment.

The eloquence here is that, currently, the SCOTUS is viewed very poorly by the American public. And now, this Amicus Brief is part of the public record. While I am quite sure not a single jackass Trump supporter will make it through the first four pages, legal students for the next three generations will. Engaged and informed citizens, both lawyers and non-lawyers, will read that Amicus Brief. And if the SCOTUS reverses Colorado's decision, well they will have removed all doubt, and revealed themselves to be rabid partisan hacks everyone suspected they were.

 

[d0gbreath]

That's plenty of time. The City Council only gives me two minutes.

 

[Godboy]

Her attempt will be futile! Every state challenged so far has kept Trump on the ballot. Colorado will be no different.

Supreme Court Gives Colorado's Crazy Secretary of State Jenna Griswold 10 Minutes Next Week to Argue Her Case to Remove Trump from Colorado Ballot | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

The Supreme Court on Friday announced they were giving crazy Jenna Griswold 10 minutes to argue her case that President Trump should not be on the ballot in Colorado for the primary or general election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Its not going to take 10 minutes to say, "orange man bad".

 

[StoneCold]

Her attempt will be futile! Every state challenged so far has kept Trump on the ballot. Colorado will be no different.

Supreme Court Gives Colorado's Crazy Secretary of State Jenna Griswold 10 Minutes Next Week to Argue Her Case to Remove Trump from Colorado Ballot | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

The Supreme Court on Friday announced they were giving crazy Jenna Griswold 10 minutes to argue her case that President Trump should not be on the ballot in Colorado for the primary or general election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Tell us you know nothing about civil lawsuits without being a dunce.

 

[WEATHER53]

Despite the excess liberal emotional fervor over Bad Orange Man, it’s an act if treason to declare a candidate ineligible to even appear.
USSC well may declare her to be taken into custody

 

[citygator]

I hope they reject it so that Biden can send the national guard to disrupt the vote and have Kamala throw out any state he loses on a whim. This should be really good.

 

[Rawley]

Nope, what is going to be "cute" is if those so-called "originalist" judges don't support Colorado's decision, if not outright disqualify Trump nationwide, and with a 9-0 decision.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/299107/20240129171610494_23-719_Amici%20Brief.pdf

The above is an absolutely devastating Amicus Brief. Brilliantly constructed, it corners the so-called "originalist" of the SCOTUS. SOP for the current conservative cohort of the SCOTUS is to pretend to be originalist, and to seek historical references to rationalize their decisions. The overturning of Rowe a glaring case in point. Alito writes excessively about the historical banning of abortions, but he begins that history in the middle of the 19th century, long after all the founders were dead and gone. A true "originalist" renders legal decisions based on the understanding of legal matters by the framers, at the time the Constitution was ratified, the end of the 18th century.

In this case, we are talking about the understanding of legal matters by those jurists, and Congressional representatives, that were in office at the time of the ratification of the 14th amendment, and therein lies the brilliance of the above Amicus Brief. It documents quotations from the Congressional debate over the 14th amendment.

The eloquence here is that, currently, the SCOTUS is viewed very poorly by the American public. And now, this Amicus Brief is part of the public record. While I am quite sure not a single jackass Trump supporter will make it through the first four pages, legal students for the next three generations will. Engaged and informed citizens, both lawyers and non-lawyers, will read that Amicus Brief. And if the SCOTUS reverses Colorado's decision, well they will have removed all doubt, and revealed themselves to be rabid partisan hacks everyone suspected they were.

Interesting that the opinion of these never Trumpers is that Maine's action was unconstitutional