• DigitalFrank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m asking for something that doesn’t exist.

    Most recently, it continues to not exist because States can’t disqualify according to SCOTUS.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Think the point is the criteria for disqualification and if there is a determination and who must make it.

        Under 35? Ok, a state can clearly see that they are under 35, it’s not a judgement, it’s just a boring fact.

        Not a natural born citizen? Again, a sinple fact.

        Failed to appropriately follow that state’s procedures to get on the ballot? Again, local determination is easy.

        But if the only disqualification proposed is 14th amendment, needs federal government (and evidently Congress specifically, which I didn’t expect) to determine. The states cannot unilaterally declare a federal candidate to be an insurrectionest, no matter how obvious it may seem. If it is so obvious the federal government should have acted, buy if they don’t, there isn’t a judicial remedy.

        In short, just vote against the dude. The three states were all symbolic only anyway, They weren’t going to sway the primaries and especially not the general election. Use this energy to motivate folks to go vote against him, that is the only remedy.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          If we can’t disqualify someone without an act of Congress after they’ve become president-elect then section 3 is either a dead letter or a suicide pact. There’s also the problem of why specifically enjoin congress to remove the disability but not to impose it? The reasoning they used to come to these conclusions is twisted and obviously a result of working backwards from a conclusion they already wanted.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Well I’ll agree that I was surprised they said Congress specifically, but I at least do think it’d have to be a federal matter, rather than state’s discretion.

            Note this was unanimous. The liberal justices also agreed a state shouldn’t do this. It would be a mess if you opened that up. The GOP would absolutely game that if it were allowed.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Ohhh. So you think they have to be under 35, not a citizen by birth, and an insurrectionist who previously took an oath to the country?

          Yeah, you’re wrong.