CNN legal analyst Steve Vladeck reacts to arguments before the Supreme Court challenging former President Donald Trump's eligibility to appear on the 2024 presidential ballot. #CNN #news
so far no evidence there was an insurrection, he told people to be peaceful, verdict innocent, we found him accountable to be innocent, hope that helps ,)
@@conservativeprodigy2604that you say that simply indicates that you didn't listen to the arguments or questions. They didn't say he shouldn't be held accountable.
America, thank you for showing the world that your Constitution doesn't mean anything. If they can't handle such matters. They prove Donald Trump is right when he says he will tear it if reelected.
We are celebrating, mag-at. We want drumpf on the ballot so he can lose again. We want him on the ballot in 2028...from prison. drumpf is the best thing that ever happened to the democratic party. @@Jamski101
Vote conscience! Blue red, all b.s. I'm independent voter and will never box myself in to one ideology. What this has done as an independent voter concerns me.
I am concerned about the narrow focus on trump/J6. This effort to overturn the election was pervasive throughout the GOP - including elected reps and trump cabinet. It was a COORDINATED effort. They ALL need to be held accountable.
Then they should have been charged by federal prosecutors who've spent the last 2 years investigating what you just claimed. Without a charge and finding of guilt in court, you simply have a state official determining guilt without a trial.
SCOTUS justices are totally worthless for America when it demonstrates weaknesses by not upholding the laws against a known treasonous criminal Chump. Instead, it cowardly confides in finding every absurd excuse to allow traitor Trump to continue to destroy America. These America's justices are the very crap hole of America.
@@Jamski101 even if he is allowed to be on the ballot, that doesn't mean he becomes president. The fact that we are even debating this at the supreme court is embarrassing. Not a chance he wins in 2024. will you stay home this time?
So much Bias. After today, I lost my respect for the Supreme Court.... When the court starts to call him "President Trump," after the court of appeals rule he's just a normal citizen, they had officially politics in front of the norms of the courts. I found the professionalism of Alito and the other MAGA justices insanely unprofessional.
Interesting that the appeals court basically ruled that Barack Hussein Obama can be sued for wrongful death in his drone strikes that killed innocent people, Joe Biden can be sued for allowing illegals into our country unchecked that injure or kill innocent people.
@@CelsiusOdu I'm not so sure on this issue either the way how politically bias the MAGA conservatives are. If they can't put the fact that they call him "president Trump," I have no trust with them at this point. I have absolute confidence that Trump has no presidential immunity. It makes no sense. We don't have kings in this country. However one of the justices was looking at this presidential immunity as an "off-ramp." They don't want to deal with this issue being responsible for Trump kicked off the ballot, so they want the justice department to deal with it.
Perhaps the Supreme Court could clarify section 3 of the 14 Amendment for the American people if they choose to rule against it. Shouldn’t the amendment only have one correct interpretation.? Why do we have a constitution if the Supreme Court ignores it?
They made the point several times in their questioning that Congress has passed a law regarding insurrection and that no one has brought those charges against Trump. So how can any state official just decide someone is guilty of what is a criminal offense without there ever being a trial for that criminal offense? (violates due process clauses in the Constitution to do so)
The court will more than likely steer clear of the question of 'insurrection' and rule based on that states cannot remove a national candidate from the ballot. Unfortunately, we may not have a clear cut judgement on whether Trump was instrumental in his participation in what many of us see as an insurrection. If he is elected, will all cases be cancelled and him pardon himself from all wrong doing? Where then is the Constitution in relation to this scenario?
@@jeffreyhansen8771 In regards to self-pardon, there are strong arguments against it being possible as it violates the definition of what a pardon is. It would go to the SC but I can't see them letting that through. Federal cases would probably stall/get dropped. You get into the weird areas like AG Holder was in, where Congress can't enforce a subpoena and has to ask the AG. The AG would have to serve.. himself? If he doesn't, there is no one to make him. (I think he should have testified) We don't want to be in these sorts of legal places so we shouldn't elect people who take us there. :(
The New Supreme Court Pimp's Of Trump are going to throw all these cases out just like Judge Cannon will. Only the, "True Devil's Advocate," would be able to circumvent every court in the land. Biblical Revelations: "666 MARK OF THE BEAST," is clearly indicated under Trump's hair piece! If he gets back in office, he will use USA Armed Forces and Nuclear Arsenal to destroy the rest of the World!
If the ruling stands that a president does not have 100% immunity then charges need to be brought against Trump for inciting the insurrection - just as with the hundreds/thousands of others who have been charged.
All the Presidents since the start of the Republic have been open to charges. Trump is the first truly criminal one. 91 criminal indictments. He has already been found liable for sexual abuse and fraud. Name another President with such a record. Nixon was not found liable for sexual and abuse and fraud but he would have had a criminal trial if he had not been pardoned by Ford ( a pardon which was very controversial at the time)@@funkydave100
This Supreme Corruption hasn't exactly been garnering respect and credibility in the eyes of the World. And our expectations are everything but high, sadly.
Nobody should be surprised that a body dominated by corruption and right wing extremists is not going to deal fairly with our laws. Our highest court has been conquered by maga and they intend to use this weapon against the rest of us.
“Why should certain states get to decide who the president is?” I could use that argument against the electoral college too. But ok fine let’s let the people decide. 1 man 1 vote. The actual people. Not some arbitrary number of electoral votes assigned to a state.
That argument is actually used against the popular vote method…because certain states have way more population than population than others…California and Florida would end up controlling elections under the popular vote method leaving states like Wyoming and Vermont no say in what happens in elections… at least with the electoral college, they get some say..
When has it been decided that Jan. 6 was an Insurrection ? So becuz the left has decided Insurrection by trump, without conviction, he should be kept off ballot ???!
When someone is found guilty of the criminal offense of having committed or assisted with an attempted insurrection. A state official cannot decide on their own someone is guilty of breaking the law without there being a trial as it would violate the due process clause in the Constitution.
When congress just allowed him to exit the white house as president without initiating and serving him an investigation while seated in the role as president that's why we are here watching him have the ability to do it all again. Oh and he will and worse his next term.😂😂😂
There is state rights but the federal government has rights too. No state has the right to decide for the whole country such as for president. That's a national or congress or the whole country. CO does not get to decide for me. . Abortion is not national or federal. Each individual state can decide that and not effect all the states, but president would effect the other states.
American death spiral. The Fourteenth Amendment was written by elected officials. These cowardly justices are shucking their duty. Enforce the law. I am sorry. Enforce the Amendment.
The SCOTUS did the same thing when the country was dealing with the legality of slavery. Anytime it came to the court they took an exit ramp. The Supreme Court justices get appointed on a "who you know and who you blow" basis. It's a mistake to think that they're the brightest among us, and that's putting it lightly.
It is states rights as long as its a part of the electoral college. That makes it a state level vote. The people are not voting in a national election cause their vote does not count on a national scale. it only counts in a state wide scale. That makes it a state election. only if it were popular vote would they be blocking a national election vote.
What if there was *absolutely no doubt whatsoever* that Trump participated in an insurrection? Everyone agreed. Would a State be allowed to uphold the Constitutional amendment clause and remove him from the ballot, or would they have to ask the Federal government for permission?
Trump, in addition to his publicized speech on the Eclipse (sp) he admitted it in numerous tweets. There is no doubt he led an insurrection. That was not discussed.
What people agree on has no legal standing until that agreement transforms into a finding or result with legal standing. No matter how many of us agree that Trump is guilty of insurrection, no court can take action on that agreement without a law being passed or a guilty verdict being handed down by a court with standing to try the germane indictment. Guilt of insurrection has legal consequences for the perpetrator. Without guilt of committing insurrection, Trump has the right to run for office. If any government intends to deny him that right, it better have a conviction in hand to warrant taking Trump’s right to run for office from him. How we feel about Trump doesn’t matter. We retain the right to vote however we want. How we interpret the events of 1/6 as private citizens doesn’t matter. We retain the right to vote however we want. In order for Trump to be denied his right to run for POTUS in any state or every state, the government needs to have a legally defensible reason to find Trump guilty of the disqualifying crime. “We watched it with our own eyes,” passes legal muster to be a witness at a trial but not for a presumption of guilt upon to base a refutation of Trump’s rights. Yes, it sucks to be the good guys.
You make some good points, but you have one flawed assumption--that the 14th Amendment required prior criminal conviction to be disqualified. It doesn't. The privilege to run for office being taken away is different than what is at stake in a criminal trial. The only question at issue here is who make the "qualification" determination. The SC seems to have a problem with individual states making that call, but I am not sure what alternative they will come up with.
@@03bruisercat I read this opinion regularly-that somehow states are at their liberty to decide who runs and who doesn’t based on their assessment of whether someone has or has not committed a disqualifying act. The disqualifying act in question here isn’t like being disqualified because the prospective candidate is too young or was born in Austria. Those items can be determined administratively. Disqualification in this instance is based upon commission of a specific act-in this case, a federal crime. Apples and oranges compared to other qualifications. If Trump is guilty of a federal crime, where’s the conviction? It’s inconceivable that the State of Colorado would have the standing to determine guilt of a crime without a trial. Imagine the precedent that would be set by letting CO boot Trump off the ballot because they know in their hearts that Trump participated in an insurrection but can’t point to a guilty verdict to give that belief legal standing. Red states would waste not a nanosecond kicking likely liberal voters off the voter rolls because they just know in their hearts of hearts that black people, poor people, urban people, ladies with pink hair, etc. must have committed some sort of felony. Proof? Don’t be silly. They just know. Colorado got ahead of itself. I admire their zeal but not their judgment.
They should have been monitoring any and all phone and text calls made to the Supreme Court....From listening to this...The judges sounded like they had no desire to make a decision....Not to mention the argument stating why a single state gets to decide who is president or not....there are two ways to win the Presidency the Electoral College and the popular vote...270 electoral votes ( if that person doesn't get to that number then...the popular vote then decides...) If they are asking what is an insurrectionist Had those ( Insurrectionist ) on Jan 6 gotten to them...would they then have learned what an insurrection is ? when they are hanging at the end of a rope ?
OK so when does the 14th amendment apply ??? WHEN??? Why does it exist? WHY? And what other parts of the constitution can we ignore when theyre inconvenient ???
Great questions. The laws don’t mean crap anymore. It just means every single one can be based on a word here or not there. A 10 year old would know right or wrong without trial after trial! The Supreme Court has become a joke imo. I’m thoroughly disgusted about the entire drama. And, yes, pretty darn tired of people still referring to him as President trump…even former president trump…the entire world knows that buffoon. Enough.
@@daydays12 Yup. But a dictator has no need for a supreme court when they are "ultimate supremacy". They will be undone by their own folly and inaction.
Originalism always agrees with the decision-makers politics. It's an inkblot test - you can see what you want to see and cherry pick evidence of the Framers' intent.
Political parties select candidates, the Supreme Court calls it a democratic process, and we are left with a dictator on the ballot. If there are no limits or expectations for candidates, what the hell is the point?
@@Luke-eo6kp 14th doesn't require conviction, anyone not lying to themselves knows that Trump made numerous attempts to overrule the results of a free and fair election, which culminated in his instruction to Pence not certifying and holding a rally on the same day as certification just down the road from where it was happening, riling up the crowd and pointing them to the capitol.
@@madpistol the fact you think he hasn't shown his intent numerous times shows how naive you are.... He's anti democratic, wanted to install himself as POTUS against the results of an election, wants to punish all those that don't bend the knee, thinks he knows best and is the center of everything. Good to see the US education system failing as per usual.
That's crap to not uphold CO SC. Insurrection is insurrection and he disqualified himself by engaging in it - literally inciting it. The justices would be talking differently if they had been in the capitol on Jan. 6th. Federal constitutional eligibility is what CO dared to take a stand. The justices are just looking for an off-ramp. They never should have taken up the case.
The supreme court did the same thing with slavery. Their rulings were around the edges but they never would address the real issue. Eventually the country blew up . Common sense diminishes with each layer of the judicial system until you reach the SCOTUS where it is completely absent, and historically they've done a lot more damage than good. The fact that they're looking for an exit ramp rather than solving a problem tells you everything you need to know.
Alito insinuating that different states having a push back should be a concern is ridiculous given he literally said the exact opposite when issuing the Dobbs decision.
The Dobbs decision didn't effect a national election. That'd be like saying each state can set their own immigration policy and they've already ruled in favor of Biden on that so this is simply in line with that legal concept. The Dobbs decision doesn't have the national interest in mind because there's no federal law regarding abortion.
@@InAMinMathsI was about to say the same thing. Remember trump said it was fixed when Ted Cruz won the 2016 Iowa caucus. But these morons believe it every time
Interesting that on Fox, Turley mentions the Electoral College System because under that system each State does decide who to elect for President. What it doesn’t allow for is cherry picked “Alternate Slates of Electors” based upon the losing candidate’s desire to remain in office. This parsing of guilt is like trying to separate the ingredients from the whole enchilada and taste test them independently. The entire dish is overwhelmingly distinct as being illegal, no matter what you call it. An enchilada by any other name would taste no different. (No enchiladas were harmed in the expression of this opinion.)
Random anecdote. My wife and I were at a zoo west of Melbourne and we came to the native animal species section. Seeing a certain Australian animal she shouted gleefully "oh look, enchiladas!" I needed to sit down for a while. 🙂
Random fact: regardless of what scotus rules here, the constitution also says each state dictates how it’s voting process works. If Colorado determines their voting process dictates anyone accused of insurrection or aiding those that committed insurrection (with proof), like trump, cannot be apart of their election process, then the constitution protects that regardless of what scotus rules here. Secondly, if Texas can ignore scotus, so can any state. Who’s going to stop Colorado from keeping trump off the ballot?
So the standard you're applying is simply being accused of a crime now? He has no due process rights? A state official can just say he's guilty of a crime without there being any trial? You cool with concentration camps too?
Texas did not ignore SCOTUS. SCOTUS just ruled that the Feds can cut TX razor wire they put in place. They did not rule on anything other than that. So Texas is not ignoring anything.
Their ruling will include whether individual states have the power to keep candidates off the ballot. In any event, if states do disqualify him, he will appeal and probably not get an answer before he takes office. He can only be removed from office by impeachment at that point. But he will be a dictator and all bets are off. Thank you, guardians of democracy, SCOTUS.
SCOTUS justices are totally worthless for America when it demonstrates weaknesses by not upholding the laws against a known treasonous criminal Chump. Instead, it cowardly confides in finding every absurd excuse to allow traitor Trump to continue to destroy America. These America's justices are the very crap hole of America.
The president is an officer of the United States. The constitution establishes officers without offices, and this is perfectly understandable and legal. But this legal understanding doesn't mute the fact and legal understanding that a person holding an office is an officer. And it has long been understood that The Presidency is the highest Office in the Nation. POTUS is the highest officer of the land.
@@iamboborilee Because every single one of them were looking for a way out of making the right decision. None of them want to be associated with rubbing him out.
All we heard year after multiple years of let's let the states by Republican Fundamentalist religious nut bags.. states rights..states right. States right.. on abortion , yeah we all see exactly what that really means.🤬🫴🎤
The immunity ruling will not be in Trump's favor. That's the one that matters. That's the one that nudges Trump along the path that ends with him in a jail cell.
Then, they cannot call themselves originalists. The Constitution is very clear and concise in this matter. We can't pick and choose which laws we follow and which we do not.
Well he hasnt been found guilty of insurrection in fact he was acquitted of it by the senate in the second impeachment trial and congress is the body that has the power to enforce the 14th amendment based off of section 5 of that amendment. This isnt hard buttercup suck it up and try not to cry to much about it youre wrong and thats going to happen a lot in your life.
Tell that to the democrat ran DOJ that puts black men in prison for skipping their tax bill then let’s rich white democrats do the same. The list goes on black, brown, and poor locked up for drugs yet bidens can have them in the white house. You will blindly support them so change never happens.
Colorado...thank you for your courage and truth. Everyone must vote away from fear, lies, insanity, imorality chaos and greed and towards building a fairer America for all its citizens. That's BLUE folks.
courage and truth My ass they are afraid Trump will win again and make america great again? Has any other candidate been taken off the ballot? or even tried? Come people turn your thinking caps on. Dont listen to every whim or thought do your own research find out the facts
Exactly. The SC is just fine with letting states decide on issues they want for MAGA morons. But when it come to states rights on elections that affect MAGA morons and Chump, then supposedly the states have no rights then. Get with it SC and uphold the Constitution and the 14th Amendment which Colorado legally and correctly decided. Chump is DISQUALIFIED.
You may have read someone else’s comment. I’ve voted in every election since 1976. I believe that all votes ought to be as legal as another state’s. That’s why Electoral College is genius. If we only used popular vote, the 4 biggest states would usually decide every election. The EC helps to balance our votes so that all are heard to the extent that they can be. No system is perfect, but I’ll stack ours against any other nation in the world.
So for real it’s up to the states for women’s rights but not for qualifying a candidate? The states hold their own elections and should be allowed to eliminate candidates from their ballot. 10th amendment.
Actually, no, the states write the rules under the US Constituion: Article 2: "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" This has been interpreted as the states run their own elections, even for president.@@funkydave100
4591:" R U going to be loyal to ME or to constitution" Taylor Swift:" the worst president" Putin" U R the most vicious president" Judge Luttig+ Professor Tribe+ Colorado supreme court:" Trump should be off ballots" Scotus...???
Why aren’t the Primaries all held on one day then? Why do New Hampshire and Iowa get to vote first and we see candidates drop out because of results in just one or 2 states?
That's an excellent question that has also been on my mind. Why isn't the general election done state by state like the primary if that is somehow better ?
@@maplebones its because the parties are private and can decide how they want to run it. the primary orders are purely setup to benefit the establishment in the party
Exactly! And we already have different ballots from state to state. This is all another bullsh*t manipulation of dt to try to get special treatment. And someday--in the future at an unspecified time that may never come--then he could be accountable according to McConnell and all the legal scholars. If these inconsistencies and lack of common sense in deference to dt continue, we are headed for civil uprising for sure.
Oh like how Democrats closed primaries early in 4 states , preventing any challenger to appear other than Joe Biden?? You need to take a Civics class on US gov't.
Then why are states allowed to run elections with their own laws? Why can't every state hold a primary then? Why do some states hold caucuses? Why do some states have same day registration and others don't? Then what is a state right?
We won't know from this bunch. Any challenge will end up in the SCOTUS and there's no appealing the SCOTUS. That's why they get away with sham rulings.
It's supposed to get decided through the very process we're witnessing. In the end SCOTUS decides on any constitutional issue, and then enforcement measures either do or don't follow. In this case any penal consequences would be dwarfed by the rulings impact on the 2024 general election. If they say 'yay', it's a constitutional violation. If they say 'nay', then it isn't.
While they won't be able to use case law for precedent, the supreme court is the highest level court in the country. Im comfortable with whatever decision the Supreme Court makes. I'm not a news guy, and to be honest I can't stand CNN or FOX but this was a very good unbiased panel. A breath of fresh air.
Big miss here- Colorado is not deciding it for the country, they are deciding it for Colorado. The rest of the country could vote for Trump and he would still be president. Then Colorado would have him as president too. I’m deeply disappointed in this obvious error by the Supreme Court
I'm not so worried about this one . Biden is going to win, and I don't want citazen Trump saying it's because he was allowed on the ballot. I want it to be far and square. But I hope they don't take the other case and he get tried before elections so people can vote accordingly.
If states don’t enforce than who does? A simple majority of Congress can’t dictate what a 2/3’s majority was intended to RECTIFY, not disqualify in the first place.
This case has always reminded me of the Manson case. Charles Manson wasn’t anywhere near the scene of the crime, yet he spent the rest of his life behind bars.
here is my problem I have been making losses trying to make trade. I thought to trade demo is just like the real..can anyone help me out or at least tell me on what to do.
you must have these things in mind 1. Have a long term mindset. 2. Be willing to take *risk*. 3. Be careful, if you're not spending to earn back, then stop spending. 4. Never claim to know - Ask questions and it's best you work with an assistant.
The wisest thought that is in everyone's minds today is to invest in different income flows that do not depend on the government, especially with the current economic crisis around the world. This is still a good time to invest in gold, silver and digital currencies (BTC, ETH. stock,silver and gold)
When it comes to Trade, I can confidently say that bitcoin is the best option. But most people think it's all about buying and leaving it to rise but It takes a lot more you need to trade it to earn daily.
Those yahoos on the Colorado Supreme Court should try reading and understand what is at stake here. A President that didn't do anything...not tried nor convicted of insurrection. A stupid liberal voter or voters in Colorado tried to utilize the legal system to get it to bend to their wishes of blocking Trump from the ballot.
I think that there was a few Justices that should have held back and not have been in attendance today. If there can be states making decisions about voting districts that are difficult for some people to vote, like Louisiana, then it would seems to me that states already have the right to change the country's outcome already.
The court in New Mexico removed a seat holder from office merely because they were present on January 6 at the insurrection. The officeholder was not indicted and was not convicted but the courts removed him from office under 14-3 shortly after the insurrection. So clearly there is judicial precedent on removing people under 14-3 if they participated in an insurrection even if they weren't convicted or indicted. Based upon the above judicial precedent, Congress does not need to act in order for the courts to act under the 14th amendment Section 3.
It's not about a win for Colorado only. It's about the enforceability of the 14th Amendment, Section 3. That shouldn't even be a question. It should obviously be enforceable on its own.
@@silentmajority8365 LOL None of the former Confederate men were ever tried by a court and were excluded under the 14th Amendment, Sec. 3. Conviction is not a requirement, only obvious guilt and we all witnessed the insurrection for ourselves and guilt isn't even a question.
@@rhondah1587 Well I dont considerate it an insurrection so who gets to decide thats what it was and how do you do that without trial. Now I do consider Joes dereliction of duty at the border an insurrection which I am sure you dont so.......do you see how stupid you are being insisting that a trial isnt required to determine if someone is guilty of the crime of insurrection?
If the justices don't believe it's practical for a state to keep and insurrectionist off of the ballot, then what is the purpose of the 14th amendment? We don't follow the Constitution because it's too hard to follow?
But they are following the Constitution. Trump hasn't been convicted, let alone charged with insurrection. No one has. No amendment can override due process, presumption of innocence, and trial by jury. It's alleged Trump committed insurrection but unless and until convicted those allegations remain unproven.
Go listen to the oral argument. The Justices made it very clear what they think the 14th Amendment means and what the problems are. These CNN guys are a bunch of clowns. The officer/office argument wasn't rejected by the justices, and isn't only about "it's not written in the amendment" like this CNN guy said, and that the 14th Amendment can only be enforced by Congress wasn't argued by anyone. They also go into the historical usage and context of the 14th Amendment during the hearing. If you want the answer to your question, go listen to it. That's the easiest way to learn.
Are we in circular argument territory here? Isn't the remedy for the argument that Colorado can't decide something like this to appeal the ruling to the SCOTUS and have them decide?
If the court uses the argument that it can be done to any candidate, that would mean that there has to be a solid reason to do so and not just hearsay. When it comes to 1/6 the president should've stopped the attempted take down of our government but chose not to take action while waiting to see if insurrectionists could actually pull this off. Solid proof.
The attempted take down where the only guns present that day were in the hands of law enforcement. Even the FBI admits that there was no insurrection. Don't you think that if Trump's supporters to overthrow Congress they would have brought more than flagpoles? "Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." -President Trump, 1/6/21.
Ok, but what does the 3rd section of the 14th amendment mean in the case of a president or vice-president, if the states are not allowed to decide who is eligible to be president? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Can the states decide whether someone is old enough to be president? If yes, then they can also decide whether the candidate is eligible based on this requirement.
Who decides someone's guilt of a criminal offense? Should a state official get to say you're guilty of something without you ever standing trial for that thing? IF Trump were convicted of participating in an insurrection, the states would just use his court documents to prove he's ineligible the same way you could with someone's birth certificate if you wanted to disqualify for the age, or congressional documents for proving someone had already served twice.
Not one state decides about disqualifying an insurrectionist candidate because the Constitution already decided with the 14 amendment. All they have to do is read the Constitution. This decision should be upholded for all the states. This solution is honest, simple and everyone will learn: that’s why we have the Constitution. What is written there is law.
Off ramp? I thought we went to them bc they are the knowledgeable ones, the responsible ones. This sounds like the parents that are at the hearing for custody of a problem child and they are fighting to get rid of the child " honorably"
This is CNN's commentary. Its not an off ramp, there is simply no validity to colorados arguements they are non-starters, they don't have any grounds in reality.
The "beat him at the polls" argument worries me because that only works if neither side uses mass manipulation techniques, and the vast bulk of voters on both sides are mentally sound, and I am not sure that is the case.
You are right to be concerned. America's darkest days are ahead. I hope this comment finds you before it gets deleted because TH-cam seems to have a policy against visions of the future.
Because agendas were not a problem when they allowed abortions?? You are ok with Agendas if its your agenda Pretty sure thats part of the check and balances
@@evansnapp714ok and when those outside this 1/3 who appointed him also vote against it.. what’s going to be your excuse then??? lol better start because even the left leaning judges are not crazy enough to think a state can take a man off their ballot
The president is decided by the Electoral College not at the ballot box-otherwise Bush v. Gore (year 2000) and Trump v. Hilllary Clinton (year 2016) would have been reversed-the Court is asking the wrong questions and expecting the right answers…Congress must abolish the Electoral College and the 14th Amendment need not be codified in law as it should be self executing at State levels.
The states have an obligation to follow federal law and the US Constitution. There are many disqualifications to prevent people who are not qualified from running for office. For example, the GOP kept complaining wrongly that Barack Obama was not a natural born citizen to keep him out of office and off the ballot.
I thought the GOP was all about "states" right? At least that what they said when the SCOTUS overturned RvW. So why is Colorado not able to make their own choices when it comes to the Presidential ballot?
This should be the right of the State. The states should keep or should remove as they wish and the supreme court of the state believes. Colorado removed him. This is how it should remain.
I don't know why they won't bite on the serious decision regarding whether he participated in an insurrection. That's the whole point of the Colorado decision to bar him in the first place. If an incompetent bank robber got caught when in the process of robbing a bank, would he be found not guilty of bank robbery because he failed?
Do you realize how HEALTHY this conversation is for democracy? Grappling with these legal details is IN ITSELF making the country stronger. It seems concerning, but it's actually something to celebrate. Out the other end of this, American democracy will be MUCH STRONGER.
He needs to be hold accountable for his actions end of story.
so far no evidence there was an insurrection, he told people to be peaceful, verdict innocent, we found him accountable to be innocent, hope that helps ,)
Because you say so?? The United States Supreme Court thinks otherwise
There were Proud Boys found guilty of it.
This false narrative you post everywhere must mean you are a Russian.
Hilarious, Trump did nothing wrong
@@conservativeprodigy2604that you say that simply indicates that you didn't listen to the arguments or questions. They didn't say he shouldn't be held accountable.
America, thank you for showing the world that your Constitution doesn't mean anything. If they can't handle such matters. They prove Donald Trump is right when he says he will tear it if reelected.
Your tears are delicious. 😂
😢😢
@@Jamski101that doesn't even come close to meaning that trump will win.
@@Jamski101be careful what you wish for
We are celebrating, mag-at. We want drumpf on the ballot so he can lose again. We want him on the ballot in 2028...from prison. drumpf is the best thing that ever happened to the democratic party. @@Jamski101
Vote Blue! No way we can depend on the SC.
🤣
Vote blue and be poorer!
Vote conscience! Blue red, all b.s. I'm independent voter and will never box myself in to one ideology. What this has done as an independent voter concerns me.
I feel sorry for people like you!
I’m Latino first generation I will vote red
A toddler could see this 9-0 decision coming.
I am concerned about the narrow focus on trump/J6. This effort to overturn the election was pervasive throughout the GOP - including elected reps and trump cabinet. It was a COORDINATED effort. They ALL need to be held accountable.
Then they should have been charged by federal prosecutors who've spent the last 2 years investigating what you just claimed.
Without a charge and finding of guilt in court, you simply have a state official determining guilt without a trial.
SCOTUS justices are totally worthless for America when it demonstrates weaknesses by not upholding the laws against a known treasonous criminal Chump. Instead, it cowardly confides in finding every absurd excuse to allow traitor Trump to continue to destroy America. These America's justices are the very crap hole of America.
They'll get to members of Congress in about 10 years... They're still looking for the low-level goons that participated in the insurrection.
Judge cannon will help trump also won't hear case in time jack smith needs her recused immediately
Indeed!
y'all should make a video about how much you have to lie to yourself to be a trump supporter and what those lies are
Your tears are delicious. 😂👍
Trump is going to win 9 to 0
My son Beau was killed in Iraq - Demented biden.
Nuff said.
Ignorant people don’t you see what those democrats are doing to this country and you are still supporting those currupt politicians
Trump 2024 💪💪💪
@@Jamski101 even if he is allowed to be on the ballot, that doesn't mean he becomes president. The fact that we are even debating this at the supreme court is embarrassing. Not a chance he wins in 2024. will you stay home this time?
Trump is winning... you need to turn that around on yourself.
So much Bias. After today, I lost my respect for the Supreme Court.... When the court starts to call him "President Trump," after the court of appeals rule he's just a normal citizen, they had officially politics in front of the norms of the courts. I found the professionalism of Alito and the other MAGA justices insanely unprofessional.
Does it mean a president has absolute immunity,as Trump claims?
Interesting that the appeals court basically ruled that Barack Hussein Obama can be sued for wrongful death in his drone strikes that killed innocent people, Joe Biden can be sued for allowing illegals into our country unchecked that injure or kill innocent people.
Some of the toughest questions directed at Colorado's rep were posed by the liberal justices. They were hammering him.
And that ultra right wing conservative Kenji Brown! Her questions were atrocious!
@@CelsiusOdu I'm not so sure on this issue either the way how politically bias the MAGA conservatives are. If they can't put the fact that they call him "president Trump," I have no trust with them at this point.
I have absolute confidence that Trump has no presidential immunity. It makes no sense. We don't have kings in this country. However one of the justices was looking at this presidential immunity as an "off-ramp." They don't want to deal with this issue being responsible for Trump kicked off the ballot, so they want the justice department to deal with it.
Democracy says innocent until proven guilty.
Trump literally went against the constitution and is a threat to democracy.
Gorsuch himself ruled in 2012 that Colorado Sec. of State could disqualify a presidential candidate (the Hassan case. He was not natural born)
What is the case?
Hassan v. Colorado@@darwinfinche9959
But the real question is, is Trump a convicted insurrectionist? No, so he remains on the ballot.
Perhaps the Supreme Court could clarify section 3 of the 14 Amendment for the American people if they choose to rule against it. Shouldn’t the amendment only have one correct interpretation.? Why do we have a constitution if the Supreme Court ignores it?
That Amendment was created for the Confederates.
They made the point several times in their questioning that Congress has passed a law regarding insurrection and that no one has brought those charges against Trump. So how can any state official just decide someone is guilty of what is a criminal offense without there ever being a trial for that criminal offense? (violates due process clauses in the Constitution to do so)
The court will more than likely steer clear of the question of 'insurrection' and rule based on that states cannot remove a national candidate from the ballot. Unfortunately, we may not have a clear cut judgement on whether Trump was instrumental in his participation in what many of us see as an insurrection. If he is elected, will all cases be cancelled and him pardon himself from all wrong doing? Where then is the Constitution in relation to this scenario?
@@jeffreyhansen8771 In regards to self-pardon, there are strong arguments against it being possible as it violates the definition of what a pardon is. It would go to the SC but I can't see them letting that through. Federal cases would probably stall/get dropped. You get into the weird areas like AG Holder was in, where Congress can't enforce a subpoena and has to ask the AG. The AG would have to serve.. himself? If he doesn't, there is no one to make him. (I think he should have testified)
We don't want to be in these sorts of legal places so we shouldn't elect people who take us there. :(
The Constitution is garbage. It’s just a bunch of words.
When Colorado has a better grasp on justice than the Supreme Court.
... And with eyes wide shut, The United States is walking boldly and decisively off a cliff ! ...
Absolutely. So true. And virtually no one is doing anything to stop it. The 'law' has shown itself to be a cowardly broken reed.
Or fight
Actually, it's looking great and so are Trump's numbers today. Thru the roof in fact. MAGA ascendancy.
The New Supreme Court Pimp's Of Trump are going to throw all these cases out just like Judge Cannon will.
Only the, "True Devil's Advocate," would be able to circumvent every court in the land.
Biblical Revelations: "666 MARK OF THE BEAST," is clearly indicated under Trump's hair piece!
If he gets back in office, he will use USA Armed Forces and Nuclear Arsenal to destroy the rest of the World!
With red hats cheering the whole time
If the ruling stands that a president does not have 100% immunity then charges need to be brought against Trump for inciting the insurrection - just as with the hundreds/thousands of others who have been charged.
Exactly
then every other president is open to any charges as well including obama
All the Presidents since the start of the Republic have been open to charges. Trump is the first truly criminal one. 91 criminal indictments. He has already been found liable for sexual abuse and fraud. Name another President with such a record. Nixon was not found liable for sexual and abuse and fraud but he would have had a criminal trial if he had not been pardoned by Ford ( a pardon which was very controversial at the time)@@funkydave100
Not one person has been charged and convicted of insurrection wow learn criminal code
FALSE. No other president in my 42 years of living broke the laws/constitution like DJT Did. Hypocrites I despise indeed.🙄
This Supreme Corruption hasn't exactly been garnering respect and credibility in the eyes of the World.
And our expectations are everything but high, sadly.
9 to 0..your tears are delicious. 😂
They rule on constitutionality
Liberals don’t want Trump off the ballot because Biden will beat Trump at the ballot box. Haley… not so much.
@@verilyveronica8430 nop
Nobody should be surprised that a body dominated by corruption and right wing extremists is not going to deal fairly with our laws.
Our highest court has been conquered by maga and they intend to use this weapon against the rest of us.
“Why should certain states get to decide who the president is?”
I could use that argument against the electoral college too.
But ok fine let’s let the people decide. 1 man 1 vote. The actual people. Not some arbitrary number of electoral votes assigned to a state.
Then a few states would decide for the entire country. I'm sorry you are not smart enough to understand the electoral college.🤣
Yeah the whole your rights as an state and individuals don't matter, is what I'm hearing.
That argument is actually used against the popular vote method…because certain states have way more population than population than others…California and Florida would end up controlling elections under the popular vote method leaving states like Wyoming and Vermont no say in what happens in elections… at least with the electoral college, they get some say..
That’s at the core of our current election process - our vote is only a suggestion to the electoral college 🤷🏽♂️
No then about 5 states would decide the President..how could that be fair
The question then is, in what circumstances is the insurrection act enforceable?
They seem to be hellbent on making it irrelevant
When has it been decided that Jan. 6 was an Insurrection ? So becuz the left has decided Insurrection by trump, without conviction, he should be kept off ballot ???!
When someone is found guilty of the criminal offense of having committed or assisted with an attempted insurrection.
A state official cannot decide on their own someone is guilty of breaking the law without there being a trial as it would violate the due process clause in the Constitution.
When a president is guilty of anything, only impeachment can be used against him.
When congress just allowed him to exit the white house as president without initiating and serving him an investigation while seated in the role as president that's why we are here watching him have the ability to do it all again. Oh and he will and worse his next term.😂😂😂
State rights! Oh wait this is not about abortion? Nevermind shut up states
No, this about the politicization of The Supreme Court....
No. The national government is in charge of murder laws for the unborn. After being born it's states rights. 🤪
This seems farcical.
@@FourDollaRacing I'm just confused should the states be able to make individual decisions or not?
EXACTLY 💯% what l was thinking 🤔
There is state rights but the federal government has rights too. No state has the right to decide for the whole country such as for president. That's a national or congress or the whole country. CO does not get to decide for me. . Abortion is not national or federal. Each individual state can decide that and not effect all the states, but president would effect the other states.
Historical Fact: States have decided who would be on the ballot...the southern states did not allow Abe Lincoln on the ballot in 1859!
The Supreme Court didn't take the off ramp, they took the Runway off Ramp ......
Once again they have proved why they need term limits.
American death spiral. The Fourteenth Amendment was written by elected officials. These cowardly justices are shucking their duty. Enforce the law. I am sorry. Enforce the Amendment.
However, I noticed they were doing their best to exempt term limits from the discussion.
When it's that cut and dry, there's no need to entertain. Like Kyle Rittenhouse.
Take the Insurrectionist off every ballot!!!
That would mean Trump would stay in the ballot.
It's an insurrection in your mind.
@@JohnB3363 You don't seem to understand the situation at all...
Lefty tears 😂
The jan6 democrats planned hoax? That one?🤔
In other words, ignore the constitution, because to do otherwise would be too hard.
Read it for your self not just accept what others say
The SCOTUS did the same thing when the country was dealing with the legality of slavery. Anytime it came to the court they took an exit ramp. The Supreme Court justices get appointed on a "who you know and who you blow" basis. It's a mistake to think that they're the brightest among us, and that's putting it lightly.
That precedent was set when VPOTUS Burr wasn't prosecuted for murdering his political opponent.
@funkydave100 aid and comfort.
"Go home, we love you"
"Prisoners"
It is states rights as long as its a part of the electoral college. That makes it a state level vote. The people are not voting in a national election cause their vote does not count on a national scale. it only counts in a state wide scale. That makes it a state election. only if it were popular vote would they be blocking a national election vote.
What if there was *absolutely no doubt whatsoever* that Trump participated in an insurrection? Everyone agreed. Would a State be allowed to uphold the Constitutional amendment clause and remove him from the ballot, or would they have to ask the Federal government for permission?
Trump, in addition to his publicized speech on the Eclipse (sp) he admitted it in numerous tweets. There is no doubt he led an insurrection. That was not discussed.
What people agree on has no legal standing until that agreement transforms into a finding or result with legal standing. No matter how many of us agree that Trump is guilty of insurrection, no court can take action on that agreement without a law being passed or a guilty verdict being handed down by a court with standing to try the germane indictment. Guilt of insurrection has legal consequences for the perpetrator. Without guilt of committing insurrection, Trump has the right to run for office. If any government intends to deny him that right, it better have a conviction in hand to warrant taking Trump’s right to run for office from him. How we feel about Trump doesn’t matter. We retain the right to vote however we want. How we interpret the events of 1/6 as private citizens doesn’t matter. We retain the right to vote however we want. In order for Trump to be denied his right to run for POTUS in any state or every state, the government needs to have a legally defensible reason to find Trump guilty of the disqualifying crime. “We watched it with our own eyes,” passes legal muster to be a witness at a trial but not for a presumption of guilt upon to base a refutation of Trump’s rights. Yes, it sucks to be the good guys.
You make some good points, but you have one flawed assumption--that the 14th Amendment required prior criminal conviction to be disqualified. It doesn't. The privilege to run for office being taken away is different than what is at stake in a criminal trial. The only question at issue here is who make the "qualification" determination. The SC seems to have a problem with individual states making that call, but I am not sure what alternative they will come up with.
@@03bruisercat I read this opinion regularly-that somehow states are at their liberty to decide who runs and who doesn’t based on their assessment of whether someone has or has not committed a disqualifying act. The disqualifying act in question here isn’t like being disqualified because the prospective candidate is too young or was born in Austria. Those items can be determined administratively. Disqualification in this instance is based upon commission of a specific act-in this case, a federal crime. Apples and oranges compared to other qualifications. If Trump is guilty of a federal crime, where’s the conviction? It’s inconceivable that the State of Colorado would have the standing to determine guilt of a crime without a trial. Imagine the precedent that would be set by letting CO boot Trump off the ballot because they know in their hearts that Trump participated in an insurrection but can’t point to a guilty verdict to give that belief legal standing. Red states would waste not a nanosecond kicking likely liberal voters off the voter rolls because they just know in their hearts of hearts that black people, poor people, urban people, ladies with pink hair, etc. must have committed some sort of felony. Proof? Don’t be silly. They just know. Colorado got ahead of itself. I admire their zeal but not their judgment.
They should have been monitoring any and all phone and text calls made to the Supreme Court....From listening to this...The judges sounded like they had no desire to make a decision....Not to mention the argument stating why a single state gets to decide who is president or not....there are two ways to win the Presidency the Electoral College and the popular vote...270 electoral votes ( if that person doesn't get to that number then...the popular vote then decides...) If they are asking what is an insurrectionist Had those ( Insurrectionist ) on Jan 6 gotten to them...would they then have learned what an insurrection is ? when they are hanging at the end of a rope ?
The Colorado decision, win or lose, brought the issue to an early focus that would not have happened any other way.
No, its just gave a stupid platform to 6 useless weed smokers with sever TDS. Its over. Trump is your daddy again.
OK so when does the 14th amendment apply ??? WHEN??? Why does it exist? WHY? And what other parts of the constitution can we ignore when theyre inconvenient ???
Anyone that was a insurrectionist died over a century ago
Exactly! Biden ignores the Constitution every day with a open border
It applied to the Confederates and they eventually served in Congress.
Great questions. The laws don’t mean crap anymore. It just means every single one can be based on a word here or not there. A 10 year old would know right or wrong without trial after trial! The Supreme Court has become a joke imo. I’m thoroughly disgusted about the entire drama. And, yes, pretty darn tired of people still referring to him as President trump…even former president trump…the entire world knows that buffoon. Enough.
@@wendywright4397 President Trump, Trump 2024 🇺🇸
"I'm an originalist until originalism doesn't agree with my politics."
Scandalous talk from a judge isn't it? The judges in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s behaved in a similar way to help their friend H.
Exactly.
@@daydays12 Yup. But a dictator has no need for a supreme court when they are "ultimate supremacy". They will be undone by their own folly and inaction.
Explain how originalism didn't take place here? When was Trump found guilty of insurrection?
Originalism always agrees with the decision-makers politics. It's an inkblot test - you can see what you want to see and cherry pick evidence of the Framers' intent.
If it's not 9-0. ...it's a disgrace...
Political parties select candidates, the Supreme Court calls it a democratic process, and we are left with a dictator on the ballot. If there are no limits or expectations for candidates, what the hell is the point?
Criminal conviction?
Just don’t vote for him lol. It’s quite simple. If he’s truly a dictator, he won’t win right lol?
The fact that you call Trump a "dictator" shows just how delusional you are.
@@Luke-eo6kp 14th doesn't require conviction, anyone not lying to themselves knows that Trump made numerous attempts to overrule the results of a free and fair election, which culminated in his instruction to Pence not certifying and holding a rally on the same day as certification just down the road from where it was happening, riling up the crowd and pointing them to the capitol.
@@madpistol the fact you think he hasn't shown his intent numerous times shows how naive you are.... He's anti democratic, wanted to install himself as POTUS against the results of an election, wants to punish all those that don't bend the knee, thinks he knows best and is the center of everything. Good to see the US education system failing as per usual.
That's crap to not uphold CO SC. Insurrection is insurrection and he disqualified himself by engaging in it - literally inciting it. The justices would be talking differently if they had been in the capitol on Jan. 6th. Federal constitutional eligibility is what CO dared to take a stand. The justices are just looking for an off-ramp. They never should have taken up the case.
They would also be talking about it differently if it was Biden.
So right. It is so sad to watch the US decline so far into the mire.
Really? prove he cited an insurecction Sir and ill show you proof he didnt by his words
@@funkydave100 he admitted it in his own words that the INSURRECTION was lead by Nancy Pelosi. He admitted it was an insurrection.
I’m waiting to hear your proof that he did not lead an insurrection
The supreme court did the same thing with slavery. Their rulings were around the edges but they never would address the real issue. Eventually the country blew up . Common sense diminishes with each layer of the judicial system until you reach the SCOTUS where it is completely absent, and historically they've done a lot more damage than good. The fact that they're looking for an exit ramp rather than solving a problem tells you everything you need to know.
Redneck shit
Keep Defrauder Trump on the ballots so we can have the satisfaction of voting against him in Nov!
That is the only way to get the message across
I agree, Democracy is always better than this Democrat illegal action to destroy Democracy.
Warning democrats tears.
You support election interference Jack?
Are you mailing your ballot from Moscow again?
The first three words..."No person shall"....
The President is a 'person' as you point out. But these cowardly goons don't bother about the text of the Constitution.
@@heemlo649 Sometimes it seems debatable. He is a deceitful con-artist person in it for himself.
Alito insinuating that different states having a push back should be a concern is ridiculous given he literally said the exact opposite when issuing the Dobbs decision.
Literally
The Dobbs decision didn't effect a national election. That'd be like saying each state can set their own immigration policy and they've already ruled in favor of Biden on that so this is simply in line with that legal concept. The Dobbs decision doesn't have the national interest in mind because there's no federal law regarding abortion.
Why isnt cnn showing biden speech last night to the American people..embarrassing for them🙄
As a never trumper I am ok with him staying on the ballot. I don’t want any reason for is followers to cry foul when he looses the 2024 election.
They’ll cry foul anyway. Look at 20…
Indeed! The orange utan will start claiming voter fraud about November 2024 any day now! @@InAMinMaths
@@InAMinMathsI was about to say the same thing. Remember trump said it was fixed when Ted Cruz won the 2016 Iowa caucus. But these morons believe it every time
They're already crying about rigging.
They will say the 2024 election was rigged too of course.
Interesting that on Fox, Turley mentions the Electoral College System because under that system each State does decide who to elect for President. What it doesn’t allow for is cherry picked “Alternate Slates of Electors” based upon the losing candidate’s desire to remain in office. This parsing of guilt is like trying to separate the ingredients from the whole enchilada and taste test them independently. The entire dish is overwhelmingly distinct as being illegal, no matter what you call it. An enchilada by any other name would taste no different. (No enchiladas were harmed in the expression of this opinion.)
The only harm was that we don’t get our time back from reading that
@@coldwarveteran6211 Trump wants to ban enchiladas. :(
Random anecdote. My wife and I were at a zoo west of Melbourne and we came to the native animal species section. Seeing a certain Australian animal she shouted gleefully "oh look, enchiladas!" I needed to sit down for a while. 🙂
You might be interested in what John F. Kennedy did in Hawaii.
YES I read that and totally different than what LOSER trump did@@toadsauce8091
This is SICKENING that the SCOTUS allows a TRAITOR who created an INSURRECTION can still run to do it again!!! SICKENING!!!
What point is the Constitution if it's not upheld?
Indeed
it wasn't upheld?
@@iamboborilee They looked at the text of the 14th Amendment and decided to ignore it for political reasons.
@@JohnDoe-jh5yr The lower court decision that DJT had engaged in insurrection was ignored by SCOTUS.
@@JohnDoe-jh5yr How do you mean?
Random fact: regardless of what scotus rules here, the constitution also says each state dictates how it’s voting process works. If Colorado determines their voting process dictates anyone accused of insurrection or aiding those that committed insurrection (with proof), like trump, cannot be apart of their election process, then the constitution protects that regardless of what scotus rules here.
Secondly, if Texas can ignore scotus, so can any state. Who’s going to stop Colorado from keeping trump off the ballot?
So the standard you're applying is simply being accused of a crime now?
He has no due process rights? A state official can just say he's guilty of a crime without there being any trial?
You cool with concentration camps too?
Texas did not ignore SCOTUS. SCOTUS just ruled that the Feds can cut TX razor wire they put in place. They did not rule on anything other than that. So Texas is not ignoring anything.
Their ruling will include whether individual states have the power to keep candidates off the ballot. In any event, if states do disqualify him, he will appeal and probably not get an answer before he takes office. He can only be removed from office by impeachment at that point. But he will be a dictator and all bets are off. Thank you, guardians of democracy, SCOTUS.
@@c-gunz4482 no convictions were needed when 14 was applied after the civil war
SCOTUS justices are totally worthless for America when it demonstrates weaknesses by not upholding the laws against a known treasonous criminal Chump. Instead, it cowardly confides in finding every absurd excuse to allow traitor Trump to continue to destroy America. These America's justices are the very crap hole of America.
Why are we forgetting that above the highest military enlisted are the high ranking officers and the highest ranking officer is the president
Enacting the 14th is a power of Congress...not a state.
Not about that. About him not being an officer
The president is an officer of the United States. The constitution establishes officers without offices, and this is perfectly understandable and legal. But this legal understanding doesn't mute the fact and legal understanding that a person holding an office is an officer. And it has long been understood that The Presidency is the highest Office in the Nation. POTUS is the highest officer of the land.
@damianyoung1 US Presidents are elected, not appointed.
@@tflg3257elected to office. The constitution makes the appointees officers as well without holding office.
Whole bunch of judicial cowardice went on today.
because why?
@@iamboborilee Because every single one of them were looking for a way out of making the right decision. None of them want to be associated with rubbing him out.
@@ptgigg is it their job to not make the right decition?
Indeed but obviously saving their collective skins takes precedence.@@iamboborilee
All we heard year after multiple years of let's let the states by Republican Fundamentalist religious nut bags.. states rights..states right. States right.. on abortion , yeah we all see exactly what that really means.🤬🫴🎤
The immunity ruling will not be in Trump's favor. That's the one that matters. That's the one that nudges Trump along the path that ends with him in a jail cell.
After that we can go after all government officials 😂. They will all go to jail. Biden Obama Bush
All who supported them in office 😂🎉
Then, they cannot call themselves originalists. The Constitution is very clear and concise in this matter. We can't pick and choose which laws we follow and which we do not.
Well he hasnt been found guilty of insurrection in fact he was acquitted of it by the senate in the second impeachment trial and congress is the body that has the power to enforce the 14th amendment based off of section 5 of that amendment. This isnt hard buttercup suck it up and try not to cry to much about it youre wrong and thats going to happen a lot in your life.
US Constitution gives only Congress the power to enact the 14th amendment.
Tell that to the democrat ran DOJ that puts black men in prison for skipping their tax bill then let’s rich white democrats do the same. The list goes on black, brown, and poor locked up for drugs yet bidens can have them in the white house. You will blindly support them so change never happens.
Colorado...thank you for your courage and truth. Everyone must vote away from fear, lies, insanity, imorality chaos and greed and towards building a fairer America for all its citizens. That's BLUE folks.
I am so proud of my state.
courage and truth My ass they are afraid Trump will win again and make america great again? Has any other candidate been taken off the ballot? or even tried? Come people turn your thinking caps on. Dont listen to every whim or thought do your own research find out the facts
I listened. Repugs tried to help Dumb Dumb's attorney. They have no problem letting states decide abortion care and gun right.
At this point, a Bullet has more rights in Public Schools than a 7 year old kid care of the current United States Supreme Court.
Weak people name call but they have no balls.
Exactly. The SC is just fine with letting states decide on issues they want for MAGA morons. But when it come to states rights on elections that affect MAGA morons and Chump, then supposedly the states have no rights then. Get with it SC and uphold the Constitution and the 14th Amendment which Colorado legally and correctly decided. Chump is DISQUALIFIED.
Yes. Because those are STATE RIGHTS. Not removing someone from holding a FEDERAL position. Good swing though kid, poetic almost lol.
You may have read someone else’s comment. I’ve voted in every election since 1976. I believe that all votes ought to be as legal as another state’s. That’s why Electoral College is genius. If we only used popular vote, the 4 biggest states would usually decide every election. The EC helps to balance our votes so that all are heard to the extent that they can be. No system is perfect, but I’ll stack ours against any other nation in the world.
So for real it’s up to the states for women’s rights but not for qualifying a candidate? The states hold their own elections and should be allowed to eliminate candidates from their ballot. 10th amendment.
its a federal election sir different rules
Actually, no, the states write the rules under the US Constituion: Article 2: "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" This has been interpreted as the states run their own elections, even for president.@@funkydave100
4591:" R U going to be loyal to ME or to constitution" Taylor Swift:" the worst president" Putin" U R the most vicious president" Judge Luttig+ Professor Tribe+ Colorado supreme court:" Trump should be off ballots"
Scotus...???
Why aren’t the Primaries all held on one day then? Why do New Hampshire and Iowa get to vote first and we see candidates drop out because of results in just one or 2 states?
That's an excellent question that has also been on my mind. Why isn't the general election done state by state like the primary if that is somehow better ?
@@maplebones its because the parties are private and can decide how they want to run it. the primary orders are purely setup to benefit the establishment in the party
Exactly! And we already have different ballots from state to state. This is all another bullsh*t manipulation of dt to try to get special treatment. And someday--in the future at an unspecified time that may never come--then he could be accountable according to McConnell and all the legal scholars.
If these inconsistencies and lack of common sense in deference to dt continue, we are headed for civil uprising for sure.
Oh like how Democrats closed primaries early in 4 states , preventing any challenger to appear other than Joe Biden?? You need to take a Civics class on US gov't.
Logistics
7:00 SCOTUS did NOT make a decision. They pushed it back to Florida and the Secretary of the State was then allowed to decide. This is not the same.
Then why are states allowed to run elections with their own laws? Why can't every state hold a primary then? Why do some states hold caucuses? Why do some states have same day registration and others don't? Then what is a state right?
😭 look how sad they are that the supreme court isn't falling for political lawfare
So how does the 14th amendment get enforced? Suit in federal court? Can states file suit in a Federal court and have it decided there?
We won't know from this bunch. Any challenge will end up in the SCOTUS and there's no appealing the SCOTUS. That's why they get away with sham rulings.
By being charged with the federal crime 18 USC 2383. The punishment is not being able to hold office and up to 10 years in prison...that's how.
It's supposed to get decided through the very process we're witnessing. In the end SCOTUS decides on any constitutional issue, and then enforcement measures either do or don't follow. In this case any penal consequences would be dwarfed by the rulings impact on the 2024 general election. If they say 'yay', it's a constitutional violation. If they say 'nay', then it isn't.
This is a suit in Federal Court. The highest one. It supercedes all other rulings.
They have to be charged, and then the congress decides.
While they won't be able to use case law for precedent, the supreme court is the highest level court in the country. Im comfortable with whatever decision the Supreme Court makes. I'm not a news guy, and to be honest I can't stand CNN or FOX but this was a very good unbiased panel. A breath of fresh air.
Big miss here- Colorado is not deciding it for the country, they are deciding it for Colorado. The rest of the country could vote for Trump and he would still be president. Then Colorado would have him as president too.
I’m deeply disappointed in this obvious error by the Supreme Court
I'm not so worried about this one . Biden is going to win, and I don't want citazen Trump saying it's because he was allowed on the ballot. I want it to be far and square. But I hope they don't take the other case and he get tried before elections so people can vote accordingly.
If states don’t enforce than who does? A simple majority of Congress can’t dictate what a 2/3’s majority was intended to RECTIFY, not disqualify in the first place.
This case has always reminded me of the Manson case. Charles Manson wasn’t anywhere near the scene of the crime, yet he spent the rest of his life behind bars.
😂
The court will show itself a body which renders decisions based on law or based on political expediency.
Their history indicates the latter 😡🤬
@@markfeland2285 The hypocrisy is BS, isn't it?
Enough is enough I'm smoking a joint in the woods
@waynebrady7439 great plan! Wish I could come too ...
I HAVE INCURRED SO MUCH LOSSES TO TRADE ON MY OWN,I TRADE WELL ON DEMO BUT I THINK THE REAL MARKET IS MANIPULATED BY OUR GOVERNMENT
here is my problem I have been making losses trying to make trade. I thought to trade demo is just like the real..can anyone help me out or at least tell me on what to do.
having a mentor is also very important when it comes to Trade, with out that, it can be very frustrating.
you must have these things in mind
1. Have a long term mindset.
2. Be willing to take *risk*.
3. Be careful, if you're not spending to earn back, then stop spending.
4. Never claim to know - Ask questions and it's best you work with an assistant.
The wisest thought that is in everyone's minds today is to invest in different income flows that do not depend on the government, especially with the current economic crisis around the world. This is still a good time to invest in gold, silver and digital currencies (BTC, ETH. stock,silver and gold)
When it comes to Trade, I can confidently say that bitcoin is the best option. But most people think it's all about buying and leaving it to rise but It takes a lot more you need to trade it to earn daily.
It is 6-3 on the court and they will rule for Trump no matter what.
Good try anyway Colorado. You had the courage to get the idea rolling.
Those yahoos on the Colorado Supreme Court should try reading and understand what is at stake here. A President that didn't do anything...not tried nor convicted of insurrection. A stupid liberal voter or voters in Colorado tried to utilize the legal system to get it to bend to their wishes of blocking Trump from the ballot.
I hope your state gets the ball rolling and takes Biden off the ballot.
I think that there was a few Justices that should have held back and not have been in attendance today. If there can be states making decisions about voting districts that are difficult for some people to vote, like Louisiana, then it would seems to me that states already have the right to change the country's outcome already.
The court in New Mexico removed a seat holder from office merely because they were present on January 6 at the insurrection. The officeholder was not indicted and was not convicted but the courts removed him from office under 14-3 shortly after the insurrection.
So clearly there is judicial precedent on removing people under 14-3 if they participated in an insurrection even if they weren't convicted or indicted.
Based upon the above judicial precedent, Congress does not need to act in order for the courts to act under the 14th amendment Section 3.
Well soon there will be an even higher courts precedent for that person to have the lower courts decision overturned.
I don't think pointing out that a court in New Mexico violated the constitution is the own you think it is.
It's not about a win for Colorado only. It's about the enforceability of the 14th Amendment, Section 3. That shouldn't even be a question. It should obviously be enforceable on its own.
idiocy.
8 th Amendment say you get a trial if accused of a crime
Get a law degree lol
@@silentmajority8365 LOL None of the former Confederate men were ever tried by a court and were excluded under the 14th Amendment, Sec. 3. Conviction is not a requirement, only obvious guilt and we all witnessed the insurrection for ourselves and guilt isn't even a question.
@@silentmajority8365 Oh and BTW, I was a paralegal for 49 years.
@@rhondah1587 Well I dont considerate it an insurrection so who gets to decide thats what it was and how do you do that without trial. Now I do consider Joes dereliction of duty at the border an insurrection which I am sure you dont so.......do you see how stupid you are being insisting that a trial isnt required to determine if someone is guilty of the crime of insurrection?
If the justices don't believe it's practical for a state to keep and insurrectionist off of the ballot, then what is the purpose of the 14th amendment? We don't follow the Constitution because it's too hard to follow?
But they are following the Constitution. Trump hasn't been convicted, let alone charged with insurrection. No one has. No amendment can override due process, presumption of innocence, and trial by jury. It's alleged Trump committed insurrection but unless and until convicted those allegations remain unproven.
Go listen to the oral argument. The Justices made it very clear what they think the 14th Amendment means and what the problems are. These CNN guys are a bunch of clowns. The officer/office argument wasn't rejected by the justices, and isn't only about "it's not written in the amendment" like this CNN guy said, and that the 14th Amendment can only be enforced by Congress wasn't argued by anyone. They also go into the historical usage and context of the 14th Amendment during the hearing. If you want the answer to your question, go listen to it. That's the easiest way to learn.
Are we in circular argument territory here? Isn't the remedy for the argument that Colorado can't decide something like this to appeal the ruling to the SCOTUS and have them decide?
Remember the Church view on child sexual abuse? Priests laughing off the cries of children and parents?
You are so right!! The appeal takes the decision out of the Colorado State to the FEDERAL level to the Supreme Court to decide.....
The easier way is the wording of to render help or aid to such people
Since when does “a lot of people believe.” Determine guilt?
If the court uses the argument that it can be done to any candidate, that would mean that there has to be a solid reason to do so and not just hearsay. When it comes to 1/6 the president should've stopped the attempted take down of our government but chose not to take action while waiting to see if insurrectionists could actually pull this off. Solid proof.
The attempted take down where the only guns present that day were in the hands of law enforcement. Even the FBI admits that there was no insurrection. Don't you think that if Trump's supporters to overthrow Congress they would have brought more than flagpoles?
"Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." -President Trump, 1/6/21.
The Colorado judges are now your insurrectionist.😂
Hard to argue with those that know the constitution...SCOTUS rules on the constitution, not on how people feel...we should expect a 9-0 decision.
The Supreme Court speny more time asking hypothetical questions than facts pertaining to Jan 6th.
The "Supreme Court" is not a fact-finding institution. They interrupt constitutionality. In this case, misinterpret.
Because what was brought before the court had nothing to do with 1.6. This was not a trial you know.
That's correct. You understand correctly.
The facts of january 6th are weak at best but when put together it paints a convincing narrative that brainwashes a big portion of people.
@@kennethboehnen271 They interpret the constitution Did you miss civics?
They are part of the three branches of government
Ok, but what does the 3rd section of the 14th amendment mean in the case of a president or vice-president, if the states are not allowed to decide who is eligible to be president? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Can the states decide whether someone is old enough to be president? If yes, then they can also decide whether the candidate is eligible based on this requirement.
It never says the word President or Vice President
Who decides someone's guilt of a criminal offense?
Should a state official get to say you're guilty of something without you ever standing trial for that thing?
IF Trump were convicted of participating in an insurrection, the states would just use his court documents to prove he's ineligible the same way you could with someone's birth certificate if you wanted to disqualify for the age, or congressional documents for proving someone had already served twice.
It doesn’t at all
sure doesn't. I told my son; they will rule in his favor if there is a comma out of place.
@@timothykozlowski2945 So the President is not an "officer" and doesn't "hold office"? It applies to all who will hold an office.
Lock him up!
After Dodd, so much for States Rights. It's pretty fluid with these people.
Remember Scott v Sandford? check it
Except it that the Constitution states that only Congress can enact the insurrection clause.......
Not one state decides about disqualifying an insurrectionist candidate because the Constitution already decided with the 14 amendment. All they have to do is read the Constitution.
This decision should be upholded for all the states.
This solution is honest, simple and everyone will learn: that’s why we have the Constitution. What is written there is law.
Half the court should recuse themselves
🤡🤡
Sweet HOME COLARADO XOXO ❤❤❤
Off ramp? I thought we went to them bc they are the knowledgeable ones, the responsible ones. This sounds like the parents that are at the hearing for custody of a problem child and they are fighting to get rid of the child " honorably"
This is CNN's commentary. Its not an off ramp, there is simply no validity to colorados arguements they are non-starters, they don't have any grounds in reality.
If they let states decide about a federal decision about abortion. Why can't they decide who is on their ballots??
The federal government has done nothing but drag its feet, so Colorado was forced to act on its own.
The SC is supposed to interpret law not create new ones
That literally the opposite of what's happening.
You seem to have no idea how the common law system works
@@RockBrentwood With a 6-3 Supreme Court, Maga has turned America into a "Third Reich"...God help us all
The "beat him at the polls" argument worries me because that only works if neither side uses mass manipulation techniques, and the vast bulk of voters on both sides are mentally sound, and I am not sure that is the case.
I’m sure trump will finally admit defeat if he’s beaten (AGAIN) “at the polls” this time, 😂.
@@eddieperez7132 You underestimate the degree of psychological infirmity and mental instability of Trump.
If you really don’t believe that both sides use “mass manipulation techniques” you are 100% a lost cause…. Uhhh hello????
You are right to be concerned. America's darkest days are ahead. I hope this comment finds you before it gets deleted because TH-cam seems to have a policy against visions of the future.
So we lose state rights anyone else seeing a patterns
Federal election.
Don't forget the OBVIOUS political agendas of the judges in your list of driving forces!
1/3rd of this supreme court was appointed by the same exact man they are charged to make accountable.
Because agendas were not a problem when they allowed abortions??
You are ok with Agendas if its your agenda
Pretty sure thats part of the check and balances
@@evansnapp714 The law is clear
the USSC decides even if you don't like it There is no alternative
The affirmative action judge sided with democracy. That’s how bingo this argument is. Only radicals would want this.
@@evansnapp714ok and when those outside this 1/3 who appointed him also vote against it.. what’s going to be your excuse then??? lol better start because even the left leaning judges are not crazy enough to think a state can take a man off their ballot
They deployed a 10 foot pole, we don't want to touch this, not our problem, let Congress decide.
The president is decided by the Electoral College not at the ballot box-otherwise Bush v. Gore (year 2000) and Trump v. Hilllary Clinton (year 2016) would have been reversed-the Court is asking the wrong questions and expecting the right answers…Congress must abolish the Electoral College and the 14th Amendment need not be codified in law as it should be self executing at State levels.
So, the 14th amendment is completely toothless.
Bingo.
The only thing that’s toothless is your mother and father, which are also brother and sister.
The states have an obligation to follow federal law and the US Constitution. There are many disqualifications to prevent people who are not qualified from running for office. For example, the GOP kept complaining wrongly that Barack Obama was not a natural born citizen to keep him out of office and off the ballot.
I thought the GOP was all about "states" right? At least that what they said when the SCOTUS overturned RvW. So why is Colorado not able to make their own choices when it comes to the Presidential ballot?
The audio to the oral arguments are public and accessible. If you ACTUALLY and TRULY want the answer, the answer is all but a few clicks away.
read a book. your logic is ridiculous.
It's not a state election but national
“We got him this time!” Lol
This should be the right of the State. The states should keep or should remove as they wish and the supreme court of the state believes. Colorado removed him. This is how it should remain.
Not like they care, but their approval rating will hit a new low and more of the American people will lose faith in our institutions.
I don't know why they won't bite on the serious decision regarding whether he participated in an insurrection. That's the whole point of the Colorado decision to bar him in the first place. If an incompetent bank robber got caught when in the process of robbing a bank, would he be found not guilty of bank robbery because he failed?
Do you realize how HEALTHY this conversation is for democracy? Grappling with these legal details is IN ITSELF making the country stronger. It seems concerning, but it's actually something to celebrate. Out the other end of this, American democracy will be MUCH STRONGER.
so scotus for pragmatic reasons doesn't want to do their job because it'll be messy and/or hard
Yea dude haven’t you heard, no one wants to work anymore.
Peanut butter sandwiches for lunch anyone?
Gods speed Colarado xx❤❤❤
To my advantage, what is speeding? None of my fellow drivers are complaining. Only the state and its laws complain, phooey!