this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
947 points (99.2% liked)

News

23367 readers
2963 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 166 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (11 children)

So which will SCOTUS rule:

A. January 6 wasn't really an insurrection;

B. Trump didn't participate;

C. The 14th Amendment doesn't really mean what the plain words of it say it means

?

My bet is C

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 64 points 11 months ago (5 children)

SCOTUS refused to entertain Trump's election lie. Don't be so certain they will be friendly to him this time. I hate the current SCOTUS, but they can surprise you sometimes.

[–] 0110010001100010@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It's also not like he can retaliate in any way (other than trying to provoke his supporters into acting). They are set up for life, and can continue to influence the country for years to come with or without him. They may choose to let him drown.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Exactly. They are in no way beholden to him. And even their pet issue of abortion has been taken care of, so they've paid their dues. Now they can do whatever they feel like.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Ill wait until all the ~~opinions~~ bribes are cast

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Thomas almost feels like he has an obligation to something other than his wallet, so he's slowed down on the radically unpopular rulings.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

or D, an obscure quote from the Old Testament about the power of Kings and their scepters and orbs and whatnot

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The 14th amendment also guarantees the right to seek medical treatment. Yet women are denied this right.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

The 14th amendment does not guarantee any sort of right to any specific healthcare.

If it did, one assumes abortion proponents would have used that language in lieu of privacy as in Roe v Wade

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] krakenx@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

They will probably pass it back to the states. It's not like the blue states were going to vote for Trump anyways, and the "unfairness" of it will probably boost him in purple and red states.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Crow@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Unlike other republicans who are at the whim of trump, the Supreme Court can’t really be touched and don’t have to bow down to him while still being shitty republicans.

[–] Chef@sh.itjust.works 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I dunno. The consequence of an unfavorable ruling is that the bribes stop.

[–] nomous@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

Nah that's the thing. Trump can kick rocks and there'll still be plenty of "donors" who just so happen to have cases coming up.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (4 children)

The Supreme Court doesn't really have any say in how states run their elections. That's the only wrinkle I see on this. If they tried to dictate state elections, states could just ignore it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Dippy@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Going with C. Without explicit language to the president, they will need to interpret this to mean the president included, which may be up to anyone’s interpretation.

I feel it should, however it could be argued it doesn’t.

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

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 14 points 11 months ago (3 children)

It cannot be argued in good faith. Talking about the presidency as an office has been a thing forever, and therefore the president is an officer. He's also an officer just by the plain meaning of the word officer. I never heard one peep to the contrary until people started looking for a way for Trump to weasel his way out of the 14th amendment.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 85 points 11 months ago

Good, this shouldn't even have been a debate. It is clear that Trump attempted a coordinated effort to stay in office. If that's not disqualifying from president, then nothing is.

[–] AlwaysNowNeverNotMe@kbin.social 75 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Cool, if only the states he has a chance of winning would follow suit.

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 90 points 11 months ago (12 children)

precedent! a ruling here could be used in a non hostile state!

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Aidinthel@reddthat.com 33 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Note that this applies to the primary also, so it might damage him by encouraging his Republican challengers to stay in the race.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago

This is a massively historical moment. But, with everything that has happened the last several years this is, quite literally, Tuesday for me.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 41 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Current SCotUS is hella corrupt, but I don't see them denying that the individual States control their own elections.

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 16 points 11 months ago

It would certainly be interesting to see the long-term ramifications if they tried.

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago

Sweet, consequences. Cheers Colorado.

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 35 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Man, Colorado just can't stop winning

[–] queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Colorado is seemingly a cool state to be in. I'd really consider moving there lately.

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

We also just reintroduced wolves and banned grocery bags. One of the most expensive metro to live in, but you look at the states surrounding us and you get why everyone is moving here.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago

Someone in Colorado did their job.

Now let's see how many other states follow.

[–] queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

It won't take 50 to ensure he loses, thankfully.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 20 points 11 months ago (2 children)

if he's not on the ballot in CO, they also wouldn't ratify his election.. they may not seem big, but they have the Air Force Academy and NORAD i think..

[–] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 32 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Shh! We're not supposed to talk about that.

Err, I mean, what Stargate program?

[–] Silverseren@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago

How does that work, legally speaking? Have we ever had a President in the past century that had states that didn't allow them on the ballot? Outside of having to go all the way back to like Lincoln times.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Fuck the republican traitor filth.

[–] IamRoot@sh.itjust.works 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Colorado has 10 electoral votes.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 48 points 11 months ago (4 children)

It hurts republican downballot candidates tho. There's gonna be a number of Trump voters who won't show up if he's not on the ballot and they would have been straight ticket republican votes.

Also this sets a big precedent.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago
[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I’m still scared shitless about the prospect of him winning or being handed the presidency by GOP ghouls, but this is the most hopeful news I’ve seen in a while. Granted at this point I think any Republican candidate would be as bad or worse if they won, none of them have the hold over the base that Trump does. We’ll see if it cascades in a meaningful way but we likely won’t be out of the woods even if it does.

load more comments
view more: next ›