this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
273 points (97.9% liked)

Colorado

1361 readers
1 users here now

All things Colorado

Let’s go Nuggets! 2023 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS

Go Avs Go! 2022 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS

Rules

  1. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No NSFW
  4. No Ads / Spamming.
  5. All hail Blucifer

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Interesting development here in Colorado regarding Trump and the 14th amendment.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 41 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Fight to get him disqualified in enough states to prevent him from winning the primaries.

But, importantly, not all of them.

Prevent the GOP from coalescing around a single candidate, and they don't stand a chance in 2024

[–] naonintendois@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago

This is already getting appealed to the Supreme Court, so it's going to get fully resolved one way or the other. I can only hope they uphold the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.

[–] NovemberMan@mastodon.social 2 points 2 years ago

@Wogi 👍🏻👍🏻

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Still gotta see what SCOTUS does.

[–] derekabutton@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Not relevant here, because states decide how their ballots are run. It's similar to how some states can prevent felons from voting for life.

[–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

They already stayed their decision until Jan 4 to give the SCOTUS time to rule on this.

[–] cowfodder@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yeah, the 14th amendment to the Constitution of The United States of America isn't relevant here...

Adding /s because some people don't understand context.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If it's not relevant then why did they stay their decision until scotus can rule?(If Trump decides to take it to the Supreme Court)

[–] cowfodder@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Did you really not read the comment I was responding to, or should I have added /s to it because some people are incapable of understanding context?

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

A lot of felons* may not have the money machine to pay the lawyers to fight all the way to the Supreme Court. And there’s also the supremacy clause, so idk, which is why I’d like to hear from a con law pro, attorney or paralegal.

  • That was an embarrassing autocorrect.
[–] PedroMaldonado@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Uuuuugh! Why is this a surprise? WE ALL SAW IT ON JAN 6TH! DUDE WENT ALONG WITH THIS SEDITIOUS BULLSHIT! THANKS FOR WRECKING DEMOCRACY FOR US, JERK.

[–] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Narrator - "Fact is, they were foolin themselves if they thought they ever had democracy "

[–] Lycerius@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

This isn't going to go how we want. It feels good now, but it's essentially a free ticket for the most right wing court in decades to rewrite/reinterpret the 14th ammendment...