Posted on 12/20/2023 7:32:57 AM PST by Navy Patriot
The U.S. Supreme Court could rule "9-0" for President Donald Trump if he appeals the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling kicking him off the state's 2024 ballot, former White House lawyer Ty Cobb is predicting.
"I think this case will be handled quickly. I think it could be 9-0 in the Supreme Court for Trump," Cobb, who has served as a member of the Trump administration legal team, told CNN's Erin Burnett Tuesday after the ruling. "It will be a race to get there. I mean, the Supreme Court, though, will not hesitate to move quickly on this. They know what is at stake."
He also argued that the "law is clear" on the issue.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Agree.
If it’s used against a Democrat, then they’ll vote against it. Commies are not constrained by the principle of consistency.
It's similar to the impeachment clause where the Senate can bar a convicted politician from holding future office. They didn't vote that all future convicted impeached cannot hold office.
Still, my point stands. Even if I were to accept the broadest interpretation that Congress voted to remove the punishment genetally, the language still exists in the amendment until the amendment is repealed or amended again. A future Congress can vote to reinstate the penalty if it wishes to.
That they have not done this is irrelevant; the fact that they can argues against the idea that the prior vote removes the penalty in perpetuity.
-PJ
Pushback can’t come from SCOTUS other than the choice of wording in the decision.
It must come from Colorado in the form of
*\
are these judges required to be bonded ?
www.bondsforthewin.com
If they even dare to take the case...
I don’t mean to offend but you have way too much time on your hands.
So would I. Repeatedly.
I wonder how many SCOTUS judges,if any,are thinking these days “it looks like the democrats might be engaged in a grand scheme to commit election fraud,using prosecutors and courts to achieve their goals”.
A 9-0 ruling won’t matter.
The devil is in the details.
There are several arguments against the Colorado ruling which include that Trump never was part of an insurrection, that he was never convicted of an insurrection, that an insurrection never took place, and the 14th Amendment does not apply to the office of president.
If the majority opinion gives the REASON to reverse as being that Trump was never convicted of insurrection, then all the left needs to do is convict him of insurrection.
If the left can even just create enough uncertainty over this it could cause Trump to not be the nominee.
But I think he is going to be the nominee and win in 2024. And I think that’s why the left is having a meltdown like the exorcized legion of demons that they are.
There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Turley will use the same words in a slightly different order.
Both will be correct as far as policy, they may miss slightly on the vote count.
Of course I will have the same reaction to Turley, leaving me more mystified about life and Law.
Probably some Judges in Eastern Europe and Asia, however there won't be any SCOTUS Judges.
Good points and reasonable predictions!
The case then wound up in the Federal courts and SCOTUS agreed to hear it.
SCOTUS ruled 9-0 in Caetano's favor and in the narrative that went with the decision the court ruled that the state Supreme Court's reasoning in ruling that her 2nd Amendment rights hadn't been violated was "frivolous".
If a Maoist Supreme Court in Massachusetts can hand down frivolous rulings so can one in Colorado.
Article II Section 1 says:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.If members of the judiciary are excluded from being in the Electoral College, then their power to control the choosing of Electors or whom the Electors can select must be excluded, too, or they might as well just be the Electoral College itself. What's to stop a rogue court from banning all candidates they dislike and only allowing their state's Electors to vote for the court's favored candidate?
Any court that tries to interfere with this body by putting restrictions on its deliberations (like who they can vote for), is plainly unconstitutional and must be struck down unanimously.
-PJ
I still the Colorado case will be 6-3 maybe 7-2.
They denied Trump due process, accused him of an insurrection that never happened and Trump never convicted of an insurrection. Its time for politicized judges be purged.
Just remember that the Colorado state court did hold a trial which found Trump to have committed an insurrection. That was the case that was appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court. So it’s true he was never “convicted” of anything, and I have serious doubts as to whether such a so-called trial was even legal, it DID occur.
Bless your heart.
Good point. Would they claim President Trump has no standing or that he filed too late?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.