Have not read the separate opinion, which argues that the per curiam went too far in barring Federal courts from ruling on Section 3. Seems like that could become relevant down the road a bit.
Lmao, same Supreme Court that wants to leave everything else to the states. Funny how that one works.
It seems like no one in the Supreme Court wanted the decision of whether someone committed insurrection to be left to the states, but there are disagreements on whom in the Federal Government could make that determination.
Yep, and because we know Democrats won’t have the stomach for, the next time there’s a Republican VP on Jan 6th, they will use this ruling to announce that the Democratic winner is an insurrectionist and therefore disqualified and the same people sitting on the bench will rule that he’s right.
The reason that the Liberal justices went along with this is that they know that every Red state would just immediately declare that Democrats have “abandoned the border” or some other pretense to claim they’ve done something that constitutes an insurrection, and ban any and all Democrats from all political races.
You can’t make rulings that rely on good-faith political participation anymore, because the Right is not operating in good-faith.
Trump’s unconstitutional appointments to the supreme court and the Clarence justice taking bribes means we will never have a unbiased ruling from the supreme court.
Welp, it sounds like Clarence and Ginni Thomas are gonna be going on one hell of a nice luxury vacation this spring.