411
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

“I will be asking the attorney general’s office for their input,” Secretary of State David Scanlan told the Globe. “And ultimately whatever is decided is probably going to require some judicial input.”

A debate among constitutional scholars over former president Donald Trump’s eligibility for the 2024 presidential race has reverberated through the public consciousness in recent weeks and reached the ears of New Hampshire’s top election official.

Secretary of State David Scanlan, who will oversee the first-in-the-nation presidential primary in just five months, said he’s received several letters lately that urge him to take action based on a legal theory that claims the Constitution empowers him to block Trump from the ballot.

Scanlan, a Republican, said he’s listening and will seek legal advice to ensure that his team thoroughly understands the arguments at play.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Nougat@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

If it is true that either of them "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the [United States], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof," then yes.

[-] Kinglink@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Again that's for the courts to decide, not random posters on the internet.

Once He's convicted, you're correct. But no what "Nougat thinks" doesn't matter.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's not for the courts to decide. If it were, there would be a court-based requirement in the amendment. There is not.

It is a disqualification from office, just as being under the age of 35 is a disqualification from the office of president. No court ruling is required.

Edit: Other people who agree with me:

  • J. Michael Luttig, conservative former judge of the US Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
  • Laurence Tribe, legal scholar and professor emeritus at Harvard
  • William Baude, legal scholar and professor of law at University of Chicago Law School, Federalist Society
  • Micahel Stokes Paulsen, Distinguished university chair and professor of law at University of St. Thomas, Federalist Society
[-] milkjug@lemmy.wildfyre.dev 5 points 1 year ago

In case it wasn't clear enough, the Federalist Society is THE (with capitals T,H,E) society for republican jurists and their members are movers and shakers of the world. I'm not from the US but the influence of US policy permeates into every aspect of life everywhere.

[-] Kinglink@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It’s not for the courts to decide.

Ok, so hey, Biden said something that sounded seditious... I guess we'll bar him from running for office... oh don't worry about it, just trust me he said it....

See why it IS a matter for the courts and not just something random people should be allowed to decide? Or again, do you want this to be wielded as a weapon in the next election against politicians you favor... Because it will. Legally prove him guilty before banning him, otherwise you look like he's something to fear, and that will only bring more support to his side... but hey, you know I'm sure this will ONLY matter this one election and never be used again or weaponized... That's exactly how things like this work, right?.... right?

[-] AssPennies@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Are you going to ignore the long list of legal scholars he posted? Yeah? Ok, you're not arguing in good faith.

[-] Kinglink@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Four scholars... I'm pretty sure we can find four scholars to agree with pretty much anything, but go on. Appeal to authority is still a logical fallacy.

[-] 520@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Well, if Biden ever incites an attack on the Capitol with the goal of overturning the election, then we can bar him from office.

Happy?

[-] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Actually, in law, appeal to authority is how the law fucking works. If there's controlling authority, great. If there's non-controlling authority that is particularly well thought out, that authority might be adopted whole cloth, or with some caveats. A law journal article, for example, was the source of the "transformation" standard for derivative works under copyright law.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Except you can't find four legal scholars that agree with you.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Again, if there was a requirement for a conviction, 14A S3 would specify it. It does not.

this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
411 points (100.0% liked)

News

23259 readers
3841 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS