• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    710 months ago

    Per the 14th amendment, he was found to be an insurrectionist, so he disqualified himself. Why the fuck is that so hard for you to understand?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -210 months ago

      lol it’s not me. I feel like i’m taking crazy pills here. It’s the law of the US. There is NO disqualification of a candidate based on criminality. Again, criminal conviction does NOT affect eligibility or candidacy. Do you think i made the law or something? All i’m saying is any person can run regardless of their criminal record according to the constitution. I’m not quite sure why you are mad at me here…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Do you even know what the fucking 14th amendment is?

        Here you fucking dunce

        it banned those who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States from holding any civil, military, or elected office without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate.

        We aren’t speaking about a criminal record, nor is that the issue at hand. Learn the fucking difference.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -110 months ago

          good lord. yes, i know about the 14th amendment. that’s why he’s not on the Colorado ballot. The problem is (like a ton of things in the constitution) it is outrageously vague. It doesnt clarify who is supposed to invoke it, or when, as in before or after a person is elected. the state court could use it, or congress. If the state uses it, it can easily be appealed to supreme court (which it already has in this case, and more than once). The supreme court since 1866 has still never ruled on the meaning or application of the insurrection clause. It has been used before, but (to my knowledge) only three times prior. One was via impeachement, one was just after being elected, one was barred from running. The impeached guy was a judge and never tried to run again. The other two appealed the 14th amendment ruling to the supreme court, they both won, and both ran again and both took office. All that to say, it is not a sturdy leg to stand on and certainly doesn’t make it automatically illegal for someone to run. If it did, he would not be running. If the supreme court votes that the 14th should be invoked then it would be illegal. Lastly, i would urge you to calm the fuck down man. Damn. You all are ornery as fuck around here. I don’t like the man any more than you do but i am just stating the law. As it stands at this very moment, the idiot can legally run.