Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D) called former President Trump a “liar,” after he suggested a recent push to use the 14th Amendment to keep him off the ballot in the state was “electio…
If the secretary of state is acting outside of her (federal) constitutional purview, Trump can sue in federal court and challenge it. State officials aren’t necessarily considered states which bar federal jurisdiction. But if Colorado had enacted a law that prevented Trump from being on the ballot and the secretary of state was the one defending it, Trump wouldn’t be able to sue in federal court.
The Secretary of State is the ultimate arbiter of who gets on a state ballot in most, if not all, states. I don’t know how that could be successfully challenged. It’s part of one of their primary functions.
The “ultimate arbiter” who still needs to act within the extent that the constitution allows. If the secretary of state started banning black men from being on the ballot, that would be outside of their scope and could be challenged in federal district court.
What section of the Constitution would require Trump to be on the ballot? Quote it please. Because the 14th Amendment suggests he doesn’t belong on it.
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment (first paragraph) both deal with due process. A federal judge could say the state official is acting outside of the Constitution by not giving him due process.
You’re also allowed to reply without downvoting. I don’t know why you think that does anything, but this isn’t Reddit.
If the secretary of state is acting outside of her (federal) constitutional purview, Trump can sue in federal court and challenge it. State officials aren’t necessarily considered states which bar federal jurisdiction. But if Colorado had enacted a law that prevented Trump from being on the ballot and the secretary of state was the one defending it, Trump wouldn’t be able to sue in federal court.
The Secretary of State is the ultimate arbiter of who gets on a state ballot in most, if not all, states. I don’t know how that could be successfully challenged. It’s part of one of their primary functions.
The “ultimate arbiter” who still needs to act within the extent that the constitution allows. If the secretary of state started banning black men from being on the ballot, that would be outside of their scope and could be challenged in federal district court.
What section of the Constitution would require Trump to be on the ballot? Quote it please. Because the 14th Amendment suggests he doesn’t belong on it.
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment (first paragraph) both deal with due process. A federal judge could say the state official is acting outside of the Constitution by not giving him due process.
You’re also allowed to reply without downvoting. I don’t know why you think that does anything, but this isn’t Reddit.
I haven’t downvoted you once. Don’t make silly assumptions.