Breaking news:Supreme Court agrees to decide if Trump can be barred from being POTUS

[Babayagawick85]

https://www.cnn.com/

[r32gojirra]

“Land of the free”

Lmao

Is the well-regulated militia going to step in and fix this or nah

[Babayagawick85]

“Land of the free”

Lmao

Is the well-regulated militia going to step in and fix this or nah

If the Supreme Court approves of the ban you’ll have a civil war in this country srs.

[JustiNtense]

[OliverHeldens]

They have to deal with the Debt Ceiling in Febbruary, so this will serve as a great distraction for all the other nonsense going on.

[JayJ350]

The party of democracy is going to be outraged at democracy prevailing.

[DolphinPilot]

If they struck down the vaccine mandate, they'll strike this down, easily. However there will absolutely be a couple justices who will vote to bar him and I'm sure there will be a clear divide between the usual justices. Dem justices and Justice Wakanda Kwane will surely vote to ban him.

In the unlikely event it's withheld, I wonder if Republican states will bar Biden or whomever else on the D ticket.

But if they write him in anyways, do those ballots just not count?

[GuineaDago585]

This is it. The Supreme Court will either uphold the Colorado decision and Trump will be deemed ineligible to run in all 50 states. If that happens you're going to have 75 million pissed off Americans and it will not end well.

OR

The Supreme Court will shoot down the Colorado decision and Trump will be eligible to run, the prosecutions will lose legitimacy and you'll have a pissed off deep state.

Either way we're fooked.

[Reliance012]

I doubt it will be upheld, but I think the SC is now less likely to hear the J6 criminal appeal that’s inevitably coming. Pick and choose.

[tripod29]

The first wave of 2024 lib meltdowns incoming.



Inb4 "Trumps Supreme Court."

[bradlehman]

I’d put the odds that they allow the ban to stand just a hair above zero.

[Babayagawick85]

Mmm

[Babayagawick85]

Bump

[BDub85]

This would require some kind of constitutional amendment?

[TCmaxxing]

This pretty much secures 2024 for Trump. It’s over for libcucks

[Babayagawick85]

This pretty much secures 2024 for Trump. It’s over for libcucks

Unless we have a war with China or Russia

[Basedbaby]

If the Supreme Court approves of the ban you’ll have a civil war in this country srs.

What do we need to do to prepare??

[TCmaxxing]

Unless we have a war with China or Russia

They could also cheat again. Would be even easier this time because what lawyer would risk jail time for just challenging the election results and what news network would risk getting sued for reporting on sketchy election vote counting.

[TomPaine]

I haven't read a single page of the US constitution but barring someone from running for office when they did not commit a crime that was proven in court would be highly unconstitutional.

I think Supreme court will just ask Libturds to deal with the fact that Trump will be running.

Big news today. An Amicus curiae (friend of the court brief) was filed with the SC showing that the section of the 14th was actually legally repealed in the late 1800s. It can be seen below and seems pretty straightforward, but I just wonder how no one realized that before now.

https://publicinterestlegal.org/pres...on-the-ballot/

If true, the SOTUS decision might be a summary judgment 9-0 since there are no material issues.

[DonVonDuck]

The political establishment will never allow Trump to be president again. So I wouldn't invest too heavily in that outcome, fellas. You boys seem to forget how rigged the game is. Its like you guys forgot all about 2020. I think the end goal is to install a non-Trump Republican into office. In order for that to happen, Trump needs to be somehow disqualified from running. DeSantis was supposed to be the guy, but he's not doing too well at this point. Haley could be who they run with now, but it certainly won't be Trump. Unfortunately.

[3fifty]

Big news today. An Amicus curiae (friend of the court brief) was filed with the SC showing that the section of the 14th was actually legally repealed in the late 1800s. It can be seen below and seems pretty straightforward, but I just wonder how no one realized that before now.

https://publicinterestlegal.org/pres...on-the-ballot/

If true, the SOTUS decision might be a summary judgment 9-0 since there are no material issues.

So you're saying he'll be allowed on the ballots?

[TomPaine]

So you're saying he'll be allowed on the ballots?

If this is true, yes. Because that disqualification clause has been revoked via congress (the amendment said specifically that congress can repeal that part). So EVEN IF they say he committed insurrection (which he didn't), it wouldn't matter as that "law" no longer exists. Can't violate a non-existent law.

[Jasonw1178]

Simple, most likely they are going to rule that they have to convict him of a crime first.

The Democrats are going to argue that they haven't had enough time.

Then from there, it's going to be argued that they have had 2 years, and have tried other people, and they are dragging their feet. Jan 6th tomorrow will be 2 years ago, and during that time they have tried and sentenced multiple people, but the main one, they haven't, and their trial dates just so happen to align with Super Tuesday and other election times?

Polls have been done including democrats/liberals who think Trump is guilty who find the delays and timing to be not making sense and feel it's timed on purpose. In fact, a lot of hate and threats that have come to these DA's has been those who feel injustice saying they are playing around with justice and not doing their jobs,

[MinisterOfLust]

I haven't read a single page of the US constitution but barring someone from running for office when they did not commit a crime that was proven in court would be highly unconstitutional.

I think Supreme court will just ask Libturds to deal with the fact that Trump will be running.

You don't know what you are talking about.

[AlfBundy]

The first wave of 2024 lib meltdowns incoming.



Inb4 "Trumps Supreme Court."

Yep. Pro-democracy frauds will call to add more justices. When you can't win, just change the rules