Rob Rogers for January 09, 2024

It is their job to be sure that candidates meet the constitutional requirements for the job. That includes age, place of birth AND the requirements of the 14th amendment.

And the chant at that time was, “Get Over It”. So many of us haven’t gotten over 2020, unfortunately.

Al Gore????

It’ll be interesting to see how corrupted they really are. Another job for the DOJ to prosecute. A bribe is still a bribe no matter who gets it.

This doesn’t look good at all.

When gerrymandering cases come up to the Subprime Court, they say “We won’t get involved, because we’re the feds, and election administration is a state matter.”

I wonder if they’ll honor their own precedent when they get a case involving state election administrators determining who’s qualified to be on their own state’s ballot.

Bet the farm on the Trump court.

Now there’s a decent shot. Only Uncle Thomas was on the Court in 2000. O Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia are dead, and Kennedy is retired.

Yup, it was criminal when the Supreme Court overstepped it’s bounds and stopped a legitimate recount of votes in Florida. What a better place in the world we could be in if they hadn’t done that.

Will Corrupt Clarence share the financial package or keep it all for himself and sweet Ginni?

It’s up to the billionaires who own the Justices as to which way they vote on this issue. Clarence?

Sure, and by denying him that.. he decided go all environmental. Costing both republicans and democrats zillions of dollars in mandated upgrades environmental fees, tarnished reputations. Revenge is sweet.

Really.

Thanks for reminding me; this is not a new problem.

Everytime we get some illegitimate republican loser as president that the majority did not vote for it ends up in total disaster.

Hillary got 8 million more votes than traitor Trump did, the will of the people should be acknowledged.

And Democrats did not incite an insurrection because their guy didn’t win… Sandra Day O’Conner was the swing vote.

SCOTUS will most likely want to avoid the Trump insurrection question. Being students of the law and its strict interpretation, they’ll just about have to rule against El Dumpo and they don’t want to be dragged into that. So, they may very well pass on this question.

2000 was when SCOTUS lost all semblance of legitimacy as a non-political arbiter of justice.

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

Gerard Magliocca, law professor at IU-Indianapolis is an expert in the history of the 14th Amendment. He testified before the Court in Colorado. He posits that the FG is barking up the wrong tree. The remedy for 14th Amendment disqualification is to ask Congress, pretty please, to determine if he is qualified. I don’t expect it to happen, but what if the SCOTUS decides it’s not their call?

I’m sitting here biting my fingernails over whether our Extreme Court will decide this election.

And now the presidential immunity case is in the works – about which tRump has promised bedlam if it doesn’t go his way. One of the judges asked his team if that meant the president could legally order the assassination of a political rival. Does anybody know what their answer was?