A 9-0 ruling is not a punt.It is not.
Posted on 03/04/2024 11:38:12 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said Tuesday on CNN’s “Newsroom” that the Supreme Court unanimously overturning a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that disqualified former President Donald Trump from the ballot was SCOTUS punting.
Raskin said, “The, court didn’t exactly disagree with it. They just said that they’re not the ones to figure it out. It’s not going to be a matter for judicial resolution under Section Three of the 14th Amendment, but it’s up to Congress to enforce it. I disagree with that interpretation just because the other parts of the 14th Amendment are self executing. People can go to court and say that something violates equal protection, even if there’s not a federal statute that allows them to do that. But any event, the Supreme Court punted and said, it’s up to Congress to act.”
He continued, “And so I am working with a number of my colleagues, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell, to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by section three of the 14th Amendment and the House of Representatives already impeached Donald Trump for participating in insurrection by inciting it. So the House has already pronounced upon that, and there was also a 57 to 43 vote in the Senate. The question is whether speaker Mike Johnson would allow us to bring this to the floor of the House?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The rumor is that the court has also agreed that Trump has full criminal and civil immunity. I don’t know why they are waiting.
A 9-0 ruling is not a punt.It is not.
I’m of the opinion that the lib justices realized that upholding it could help get Biden kicked off the ballot in a dozen or more states, and voted accordingly.
These are terrible evil people
* * * * * * * * *.* * * * * * * * * *
Gog dem hitler usa
MaGog dem hitler nato - un - Vatican
Rev 13
Basically fascism is social engineering
Church ( marxist ) / state dictatorship
How many House RINOs will vote “aye”...how many Senate Rats will vote “no”?
Chemo-Brain.
Dems want riots. They are staging their protesters. Deliberately ignore the law and lie to their voters. Chaos and Death and Destruction. All they do.
Raskin IS A CLOWN, TEAM HIM WITH SWALLWELL AND YOUVE GOT A CIRCUS.
Raskin, Wasserman Schultz and Swalwell’s pronouns are dumb, dumber and dumbest.
Rat-Skin is using this ass kicking to raise money from the morons that believed it would work. That 9 -0 part will be hard to get over on all but those that already hate America enough to vote for Hitler on the Democrat/communist line.
Raghead Raskin is trying to make a name for himself.
I wouldn’t call a 9-0 decision “punting”, but I’m surprised it wasn’t 6-3 because the -3 usually get it so wrong.
I generally do not root for cancer. I made an exception for Teddy “The Swimmer” Kennedy. I think I need to make an exception for Jamie “The Skinned Rat” Raskin.
All judges from the SCOTUS gave Raskin the finger and he thinks congress can make his wish come true a fool never learns.
"Raskin: SCOTUS ‘Punted’ on Trump Ballot — ‘It’s Up to Congress to Act’"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
First, the bottom line ...
Consider that political party and media fuss about "obsolete" electoral college is because it is the only thing stopping the corrupt political parties from establishing a permanent puppet presidency that will unquestioningly sign unconstitutional taxing and spending bills into law.
Regarding SCOTUS Colorado ballot decision, maybe I missed it, but I have so far not heard from Supreme Court or anti-Trump media any mention of 12th Amendment (12A) concerning anti-Trump activist states trying to keep Trump off ballot.
Excerpted from 12A:
"The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President [emphasis added], and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate, ..."
“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters [emphasis added]; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction [spin] and no excuse for interpolation or addition.” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
The 12th Amendment reasonably indicates a write-in ballot for electors imo.
In fact, state ballots that limit voter choices for POTUS to political party candidates can be regarded as evidence not only of unconstitutional interference in 12A by the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties, but also unofficial, therefore unconstitutional compacts between the states that have not been legislatively recognized by Congress, correction welcome.
"Article I, Section 10, Clause 3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State [emphasis added], or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
H O W E V E R ...
Congress's response to SCOTUS Colorado decision would be limited to working within 12A, or if necessary, to successfully propose a new amendment to the Constitution to the states to effectively amend 12A to allow the elite, non-popularly elected leaders of the constitutionally undefined political parties to put names of political party candidates on ballots.
Also consider that the states surrendered their power to make state so-called "winner take all" laws concerning electoral votes when they ratified the Constitution.
In fact, Justice Joseph Story had noted that states with political party divided electoral votes effectively reduce the maximum electoral votes that a given candidate can win from that state, comparable to a state's federal senators voting yes and no on a given issue, effectively nullifying each other's votes.
"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote [emphasis added], while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833.
Again, consider that corrupt political party and media fuss about "obsolete" electoral college is because the electoral college is the only thing stopping the corrupt political parties that have pirated control of state and federal governments from establishing a permanent puppet presidency that will unquestioningly sign unconstitutional taxing and spending bills into law.
Seems to me that before anything to do with the 14th Amendment happens, the (prospective) candidate needs to be charged with insurrection, tried and convicted, and then the conviction survive appeals.
Only then could the question of eligibility be considered.
For Congress to “deem” him an insurrectionist, without due process of law, would seem to me to constitute passage of a Bill of Attainder.
And that is expressly forbidden.
If it was a punt, it was a 60 yarder!
Insurrectionist Raskin can now be removed from congress under section 3 of the 14th amendment. Additional charged for aiding and abating the enemy can be added.
it never was up to scouts to block Trump. not their job. glad they didn’t over step as they some times do.
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.