Some person or group has to make that determination, don’t they?
The problem is that the Constitution makes no provision for anybody to do so. Presumably you think a court should make such a determination and order the President removed from office.
I think that is a truly horrible idea. We don’t need courts deciding to give themselves such authority not in the Constitution.
We have an opportunity to vote him out of office in November. Why spend time obsessing about eligibility when he can be removed simply and constitutionally by voting?
“Presumably you think a court should make such a determination and order the President removed from office.” - SL
“We don’t need courts deciding to give themselves such authority not in the Constitution.” - SL
I think that courts have long held the ability the authority to review the facts and law regarding eligibility to hold public office. This is not new authority. There is plenty of precedent.
Do you think eligibility laws should be ignored by the courts?
What other laws should be ignored?
Do you get to choose which laws are ignored, or a “blue ribbon” bi-partisan panel appointed by the executive branch?
Maybe laws that hurt people’s feelings - ignore those?
How ‘bout tax law, nobody really likes those, right?
You are really amusing, thanks. (please post to me more often)
“Presumably you think a court should make such a determination and order the President removed from office.” - SL
“We don’t need courts deciding to give themselves such authority not in the Constitution.” - SL
I think that courts have long held the ability the authority to review the facts and law regarding eligibility to hold public office. This is not new authority. There is plenty of precedent.
Do you think eligibility laws should be ignored by the courts?
What other laws should be ignored?
Do you get to choose which laws are ignored, or a “blue ribbon” bi-partisan panel appointed by the executive branch?
Maybe laws that hurt people’s feelings - ignore those?
How ‘bout tax law, nobody really likes those, right?
You are really amusing, thanks. (please post to me more often)
“Presumably you think a court should make such a determination and order the President removed from office.” - SL
“We don’t need courts deciding to give themselves such authority not in the Constitution.” - SL
I think that courts have long held the ability the authority to review the facts and law regarding eligibility to hold public office. This is not new authority. There is plenty of precedent.
Do you think eligibility laws should be ignored by the courts?
What other laws should be ignored?
Do you get to choose which laws are ignored, or a “blue ribbon” bi-partisan panel appointed by the executive branch?
Maybe laws that hurt people’s feelings - ignore those?
How ‘bout tax law, nobody really likes those, right?
You are really amusing, thanks. (please post to me more often)