Subj : The Trump Case
To   : ALL
From : Mike Powell
Date : Thu Dec 21 2023 09:56:00

The Colorado case against Trump was not some random act by their Supreme
Court, and was not brough about by "leftists" or "Democrats."  The case was
appparently brought about by six *Republicans* who questioned whether or
not Trump was qualified to be on the ballot.  If I am reading the ruling
correctly, those 6 Republicans were Colorado's Republican Electors.

There was a lower court case (October 30-November 17), complete with witnesses
and with Trump lawyer's having an opportunity to cross-examine. "The court
issued its written final order on November 17, finding, by clear and
convincing evidence, that the events of January 6 constituted an insurrection
and President Trump engaged in that insurrection."  However, the lower
court did not determine that Trump could be removed from the state ballot
for violating the 14th Ammendment.

BOTH parties, the "Electors" and Trump, requested on Novemeber 20 that the
Colorado Supreme Court review the case.  Oral arguements were held on
December 6.  In their ruling, the Court upheld 4-3 that Trump engaged in
insurrection but also overturned the lower court ruling that the Colorado SoS
could not remove Trump from the ballot.  They ruled that the state SoS did
have, and should exercise, a legal obligation to remove a candidate from
the state ballot who was not elligible to hold office per the US
Constitution.

The desenting opinion did cite that Trump has yet to be found guilty of
insurrection.

In their ruling, the Colorado Supreme Court did cite previous precidence for
removing candidates from state ballots -- and the last time it happened was
*NOT* when the South tried to remove Lincoln, despite what a lot of Internet
memes might tell you.

Neal Gorsuch presided over a case involving Colorado in 2012.
In that case, an Independent candidate who was not born in America was going
to be on the Colorado ballot running for President.  Gorsuch found that,
because the candidate was not elligible to hold the office of President per
the US Constitution, Colorado could remove that candidate from their ballots.

We need to take the emotion out of all of this and look at the facts.  What
Colorado did, per previous case precidence, is completely legal and, if
they believe a Trump candidacy violates the 14th Ammendment, it was also
completely in their rights.

So the ONLY point of agreement/disagreement is whether or not he is an
insurrectionist.

Trump's SCOTUS defense rests on whether or not he is an insurrectionist per
the requirements of the 14th Ammendment.  If the SCOTUS finds that he is, as
Colorado did, then he is not Constitutionally able to hold the office and
can be removed from the ballot.

They could also side with the lower court and rule that the 14th Amemdment
does not apply to the President.  However, I don't see how they could
justify this, considering that the President takes a sworn oath to uphold the
Constitution so the Amendment almost has to apply to them.

The SCOTUS could also, per the 14th, kick the issue back to Congress.
Congress can reinstate a 14th Ammendment violator's rights to hold federal
office by a 2/3rds vote in both houses.  That is not likely to happen.


 * SLMR 2.1a * Buttblotting Fluid - The blue stuff on diaper commercials
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
 * Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

.