U.S. News

2232 readers

15 users here now

News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.

Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.

Guidelines for submissions:

Post the original source of information as the link.
If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
Social media is not a news source.

For World News, see the News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Powderhorn@beehaw.org

Supreme Court restores Trump to ballot, rejecting state attempts to ban him over Capitol attack (apnews.com)

submitted 6 months ago by JoMiran@lemmy.ml to c/usnews@beehaw.org

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Rubisco@slrpnk.net 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Help me understand this.
SCOTUS is saying states cannot determine who is and who is not insurrectionist enough to be off their ballots. Rather, it is Congress (the same Congress that acquitted a known insurrectionist) who is the sole judge of that.
???

Obvious answers seem to be corruption and regulatory capture. But I'm trying to make sure I'm reading their opinion correctly. Is it not essentially, "States conduct elections as they see fit. No, wait, not like that!"

[–] megopie@beehaw.org 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The case was about wether he could be removed from the ballot (having not actually been convicted for treason yet) but some of the judges used it as an opportunity to state that only congress could do that for federal elections. The case was pretty open and shut on the first part, not so much on the second.

[–] Rubisco@slrpnk.net 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Didn't the Jan 6 Select Committee already recommend the DoJ should pursue criminal charges against 45 for his role in the insurrection? Now SCOTUS wants Congress to decide again?

[–] megopie@beehaw.org 5 points 6 months ago

Recommending that he be investigated for treason is not the same as him going to court and being convicted of it. That’s kind of the rub of the whole situation, removing a candidate from a ballot because they’ve been accused of treason is a really bad precedent to set.