this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
1743 points (97.6% liked)

Political Memes

5612 readers
985 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There is nothing in the 14th amendment that says that the Senate has to convict him to bar him from office. Or that any state does not have the right to control its own ballot.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Senate has to convict him to bar him from office

The Senate has to agree that he should be barred. That hasn't happened.

any state does not have the right to control its own ballot.

A dangerous precedent if fascists get into power. Clear rules are needed.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Senate has to agree that he should be barred. That hasn’t happened.

There is nothing in the 14th Amendment which claims that, which is why Colorado took him off the ballot.

A dangerous precedent if fascists get into power. Clear rules are needed.

It has been the precedent since the beginning of the nation. The Secretary of State of each state sets the election rules in that state. That's why some states have mail-in ballots and some states don't.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As a counterpoint, Arizona Supreme Court and the Michigan Court of Appeals, decided that, in the absence of a criminal conviction, removal from the ballot was unnecessary.

It can also be argued that as primaries are the party choosing who it wants to put forward as a candidate, and parties are private corporations, there is no constitutional relevancy at this stage.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Colorado has a law that says you can't be on the ballot (even in a primary) if you're not "qualified" for the office, thus the Constitutional question is relevant in Colorado.

The problem is who decides on the (dis)qualification. In this case one federal judge disagreed with the conclusions of judges in two other states and the majority of the House of Representatives.