The court heard arguments about whether the former president’s attempts to subvert the 2020 election disqualify him from again holding office. Justices across the ideological spectrum questioned several aspects of a ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court.
Finding that Trump had engaged in insurrection was part of how Colorado got to booting him from the ballot.
A criminal conviction has never been a requirement for keeping somebody out of office under the 14th amendment
SCOTUS disagrees with you. And their opinion of Constitutional legality is ultimately the only one that has any relevance
They haven’t actually issued a ruling at this point. And I don’t have to agree even if they do
Obviously they haven’t issued an opinion, but their comments today make it clear what they’re going to do
My point is that you can’t put forth any authoritative argument on this matter when SCOTUS is just going to rule for Trump. And they ultimately decide what the Constitution means and does not mean.
Legally, they are sovereign over the interpretation of all aspects of the constitution. So saying that they’re being hypocritical or are ignoring precedent isn’t really relevant. They’re allowed to do that.
And if they do, it becomes one more reason to alter the court to fix their corrupt behavior
Legally even that is pretty dubious. Didn’t they just randomly give themselves that power once and we all agreed to let them have it?
It is true that the Constitution does not explicitly grant SCOTUS the power of judicial review. SCOTUS granted itself that power in Marbury v Madison, which was 225+ years ago
Libs should bring that up more often tbh. As should textualists, tbh