You have no idea how much this sticks in my craw. But if I’m going to have any kind of integrity in here, then as much as I’d like, I can’t always be painting the same side of the fence. Colorado is wrong, and so is Maine. And the funny part is that they’re both wrong for the same goddamned Reason that Traitor Tot is wrong in his absolute immunity appeal. The whole damn bunch of them are premature.
And within the next couple of paragraphs you’ll all be singing along with Murf, because I’ve bounced this ball over the same melody before. But normally when I spin the tune, it’s to excoriate former RNC Chair Reince Priebus and the RNC for not putting their retarded howler monkey back in his quarantine cage when they had the chance in 2015. And they’re the only ones who could. because El Pendejo Presidente was running for President in the 2016 GOP presidential primaries. And there is only one governing body for a primary, and that’s the party holding the primaries.
Because a primary is not a general election. It is a purely political process held by and paid for by the party in order to choose their candidates for open office slots in the general election. One of the reasons that some state parties hold caucuses instead of primaries is that it’s cheaper to rent a bunch of high school gymnasiums and Holiday Inn ballrooms than have to cover the cost of the state providing the logistics of a primary. This is also why states often have both parties agree on a single primary date, to split the cost.
Let’s be clear here. Donald Trump is not running for President right now either in Colorado or Maine, and not in any other state either. What Trump is running for is the nomination to run for President for the Republican party in 2024. I like to think of it like the Shriners going behind closed doors to select their Master Executive Council for the next five years. It’s nobody else’s business.
Look, there are a plethora of constitutional scholars on both sides of the aisle that agree that the 3rd clause of the 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump from holding any elected office or government office with responsibility. And since most of the conservative justices on the court boast that they are strict traditionalists, requiring that the constitution be interpreted exactly as written by the Founding Fathers, with no wiggle room for modern life, the critics are literally begging them to interpret the constitution exactly as written, since if they do that, it’s an open-and-shut case.
But if we want them to interpret the constitution literally, than we should hold ourselves up to the same standard. And my friends, there is nowhere in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution that says that His Lowness can’t run for the office of President, only that he is ineligible to hold the office of President. And if some dipsh*t political party wants to run some ass clown who can’t serve, that’s on them.
This is why the 14th Amendment question on the state level is premature. Trump isn’t actually running in the primary to hold the office of President, he’s running for the right to run for President in November of 2024. And there’s nothing in the Constitution, 14th Amendment or anywhere else that says that some pendejo jerk off can’t run for an office he can’t assume. Lets not forget that back in 2016, some teenage wag with a brilliantly sarcastic sense of humor ran on several state GOP ballots in 2016 under the name of Deez Nutz. And in a couple of states, he outpolled a couple of actual GOP candidates in the final vote tally.
Now, if The Cheeto Prophet wins in Maine and Colorado, and elsewhere, then it becomes an open question as to whether or not those states can remove Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. Which butts them right back up against the argument of Trump’s constitutional right to run for President even if he’s disqualified from taking office.
In my humble opinion, the Supreme Court is headed towards a potential 14th Amendment triple play. They will rule that the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply to a partisan primary ballot, and that Trump can run. If he wins, and various states attempt to remove him from the 2024 general election ballot, once again the court will rule that the 14th Amendment doesn’t preclude Trump from running, but only from serving as President. And only if Trump wins will it finally be up to the Supreme Court to determine whether or not Trump is disqualified by the 14th Amendment to hold office. Which will lead to a 2020 redux, with the Supreme Court racing a January 20th, 2025 deadline to determine the future of this country. Sweet Jesus, don’t touch that dial.
Thank you for the privilege of your time.
I agree. If they want to run a guy who can’t serve, let ’em do it.
Yikes! When I wrote about an off-ramp for SCOTUS and touched on the fact it’s only primary season & state Parties setting their own rules for delegate allocation I never even thought of what you’ve laid out. It will a a helluva question though. In theory what you’re saying (and I find myself agreeing) is that there might indeed be a technicality that allows Trump to be on general election ballots. That’s scary enough but worse if somehow he were to win.
It’s all the more reason for SCOTUS to weigh in, and make it clear Trump is DISQUALIFIED from holding office. A conviction in DC would give them something to hang their hat on and the GOP too. It would make for an epic GOP convention with fighting (both figurative and literal) over nominating someone who if he wins can’t be sworn in.
Murf, I think there’s a bit of a disconnect here. I agree that running for vs. holding office (if elected) IS an issue.
However, one of the other issues is whether the 14A is a test of eligibility, like being a natural born citizen and of the required age. Those, two, for example, could be used by a Secretary of State to remove someone from a ballot. From my readings (google Mark Garber, also was cc’d on some of these filings, BTW). [And that’s well before its self executing part.]
It could well be that primary ballots could be considered differently, as you suggest, because they are not “government” ballots.
In which case, if I was the US SC, I’d agree with you and refuse to grant centiorari. They could do it without a reason, or could say it’s premature. If I was them, I’d avoid the second.
Which leaves it up to later, which will drive the MSM crazy ‘cuz they’re too dumb to be able to explain why to the sheeple. I can see it now…who won who lost. Damnit, that’s all they got, and it ain’t helping anybody.
Georg Conway was right, though, their centiorari pleading was really poorly written. Megan covered it well.
Yes North of you, well stated, that is entirely correct. It is a handy shortcut for determining eligibility. If I’m not old enough, or born in the USA, I wouldn’t even be considered for the ballot. 14A is EXACTLY the same.
(Except that if you can get a 2/3 majority in the houses, you can overturn 14A, despite Trump’s ‘popularity’. I see this as unlikely.)
If you can get a 2/3 majority, you can overturn the disqualification of specific individuals or groups thereof. You cannot overturn the 14thA, unless you write and get passed another amendment, which is a heck of a lot harder. Just trying to clarify your post for others. Baude and Paulsen, and Mark Graber are excellent on this subject.
This ignores that the primaries as conducted in both states use state apparati which gives the states an interest in the election.
Question…Does the fact that a plumber fixes a leak in your sink give him the authority to tell you how to pay your credit card bills??? The states are doing nothing more than RUN the apparatus because they have proprietary control over it…
Sorry Murf. I respect your thinking here but you’re overlooking the qualifications aspect. For instance, you must be 35 in order to serve as President. Now, arguments can be made as to whether this means “35 on Election Day” or “35 on Inauguration Day” (this murky as I’m not aware of anyone that young who’s actually made a serious bid for the job) but I honestly can’t see any state allowing a candidate’s name to appear on the 2024 ballot if he turns 34 on Jan 25, 2024. Even if he met the other qualifications (natural-born citizen, 14 years resident), NO state is just going to overlook his age being below the minimum requirement. (Don’t forget that Congress had to step in back in 2008 and formally approve McCain’s citizenship as “natural-born” because he’d been born in the Canal Zone and, of course, we all remember the kerfuffle over Obama’s citizenship.)
I have previously noted that the state parties are responsible for their own primaries but, in this case, it’s NOT the Party that certifies the results of or prints the ballots for the primary: It’s the State. That’s what’s currently the heart of Trump’s recent claim of a “win” because the STATE is under a time constraint to get ballots printed (especially to ensure mail-in ballots are available for voters who NEED them–like overseas military personnel or shut-ins).
So, what happens if he ends up getting the nomination and then winning the general?
Given how weak a candidate Biden is, short of being a resident of a Georgia state prison, that is a possibility.
In that case, who does John Roberts swear in on Jan 20? Does it fail over to his running mate?