Skip to comments.
Supreme Court Reverses Colorado Decision
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf ^
| 3/4/24
Posted on 03/04/2024 7:02:16 AM PST by cotton1706
The Court holds that "[b]ecause the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse."
(Excerpt) Read more at supremecourt.gov ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: ballot; breaking; colorado; elections; hallelujah; maga; maga2024; presdjtrump; scotus; scotusdecision; trump; unanimous; winning
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-294 next last
To: cotton1706
Per Curium with concurrences
To: cotton1706
“This case raises the question whether the States, in addi- tion to Congress, may also enforce Section 3. We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office. But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal of- fices, especially the Presidency.”
3
posted on
03/04/2024 7:03:23 AM PST
by
zeebee
To: cotton1706
No if’s, and’s, or buts? I thought we’d get a nuanced ruling, or one remanded back to Colorado.
4
posted on
03/04/2024 7:03:39 AM PST
by
fwdude
(.When unarmed Americans are locked up for protesting a stolen election, you know it was stolen.)
To: cotton1706
Justice Barrett concurs in part and concurs in the judgment. She agrees that states do not have the power to enforce Sec. 3 against presidential candidates but would not go further and address whether federal legislation is the only way that Section 3 can be enforced.
To: cotton1706
6
posted on
03/04/2024 7:05:16 AM PST
by
volare737
To: cotton1706
7
posted on
03/04/2024 7:05:33 AM PST
by
milagro
(There is no peace in appeasement! There)
To: cotton1706
8
posted on
03/04/2024 7:05:50 AM PST
by
HombreSecreto
(The life of a repo man is always intense)
To: cotton1706
Ahhhhhh…..
The sun is shining……
Good cup of coffee……
9
posted on
03/04/2024 7:06:02 AM PST
by
blueunicorn6
("A crack shot and a good dancer” )
To: milagro
I’d be surprised if it were anything else. Indecision in this matter invites chaos.
10
posted on
03/04/2024 7:06:06 AM PST
by
struggle
To: cotton1706
The Dems are forced to let people vote.
11
posted on
03/04/2024 7:06:38 AM PST
by
bray
(You can tell who the Commies fear.)
To: cotton1706
I figured this would be the basis for the ruling. Barrett’s concurance is troubling thou.
To: cotton1706
Wow. They are actually referring to the Constitution in their ruling.
13
posted on
03/04/2024 7:06:56 AM PST
by
gitmo
(If your biography doesn't match your theology, what good is it?)
To: cotton1706
14
posted on
03/04/2024 7:06:59 AM PST
by
G Larry
(It's RACIST to impose SLAVE WAGES on LEGAL immigrants and minorities by importing ILLEGAL Laborers)
To: volare737
9-0 decision Yeah, Ruth Buzzie Ginsburg wasn't able to vote from the grave.
15
posted on
03/04/2024 7:07:22 AM PST
by
fwdude
(.When unarmed Americans are locked up for protesting a stolen election, you know it was stolen.)
To: cotton1706
"The
unanimous ruling also overturns disqualification orders handed down by officials and judges in Maine and Illinois in recent weeks."
Glad to hear this and good SCOTUS did the right thing. Given the state of the justice system in the U.S. -including SCOTUS - I wasn't sure how this case was going to go.
16
posted on
03/04/2024 7:07:36 AM PST
by
Bon of Babble
(You Say You Want a Revolution?)
To: cotton1706
That’s what Fox News channel is reporting. Congress has the authority not states.
17
posted on
03/04/2024 7:07:56 AM PST
by
McGruff
(Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f*** things up - Barack Obama)
To: zeebee
Solid decision, could be a landmark decision, similar to Marbury v Madison.
18
posted on
03/04/2024 7:08:11 AM PST
by
nwrep
To: cotton1706
9-0. There are still sane people in America.
19
posted on
03/04/2024 7:08:15 AM PST
by
1Old Pro
To: struggle
Yes unanimity was essential. Like when they vacated the Florida SC in 2000 election case. Unanimous ruling.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 281-294 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson