The trial over an effort in Minnesota to keep former President Donald Trump off of the 2024 ballot began Thursday at the state Supreme Court as a similar case continued in Colorado.

The lawsuits in both states allege Trump should be barred from the 2024 ballot for his conduct leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. They argue Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which says no one who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” after swearing an oath to support and defend the Constitution can hold office.

A group of Minnesota voters, represented by the election reform group Free Speech for People, sued in September to remove Trump from the state ballot under the 14th Amendment provision. The petitioners include former Minnesota Secretary of State Joan Growe and former state Supreme Court Justice Paul H. Anderson.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t kid yourself, Trump could actually win. He should not be allowed to run, but he won’t concede and he won’t stop as long as it benefits him to stay in the race.

    Now imagine the legal clusterfuck if he is kept off the ballot and wins a write-in campaign.

    There isn’t a “good” Republican candidate who can challenge him. The ones still in the primary, Christie, DeSantis, the crazy one with zero name recognition, none of them can catch him in the polls. They’re just staying in the race hoping Trump is forced to withdraw.

    • probablyaCat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There won’t be one because he is disqualified from office (if these suits are successful). Not from running. From office. If Mickey Mouse won we wouldn’t have a cartoon for president. Second place would win.

      Regardless we might have another insurrection attempt, but this time the authorities will be more prepared. So unless the military decides on a coup, a successful suit here would be the end of it for him.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The state of Minnesota cannot disqualify him from holding federal office. They can keep his name off the ballot in Minnesota, and prevent him from legally campaigning, but electoral college delegates are actually free to vote for whomever they like. This has never happened before, and there is no real precedent. Mickey Mouse has never won the popular vote for president in any state, and even if he did, he’s not a real person. Trump is, unfortunately, very real, and his supporters attacked the Capitol building to keep him in power. No shame, no propriety, no precedent will stop him. We don’t know what he’ll do if he loses this court case, but it’s probably not going to be graceful.

        • probablyaCat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, but if Minnesota says he is off the ballot it will be appealed to the supreme court who is the authority on constitutional interpretation. If they side with Minnesota, not even the electoral college can put him in. Likely whichever (if any) case goes against him, all other active trials will be put on hold awaiting a response from the USSC. If they decide the 14th does apply (a big if given the state of the USSC), then it is over. In all 50 states. That’s why groups are hitting him in multiple states. They just need 1. It isn’t an attempt to take him off the ballot. It is an attempt to end his federal political career entirely.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s no way the SCOTUS hears the case, regardless. They’ll find a way to punt on it. Only way it happens is if Biden packs the court, which he won’t do.

            • probablyaCat@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              If they don’t hear it, then it is essentially saying they agree with the lower court ruling. If they want to be against it then they have to hear it.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Bull they will hear it and rule he can be on the ballot.

              50 bucks right now to the charity of your choice. If I win donate to Doctors without borders what your financial situation will allow. Deal?

              • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                With this SCOTUS, I have little doubt the end result will be the same whether they rule in Trump’s favor or find a reason to dismiss, like lack of standing or some bullshit. If the lower court rules in his favor, they’ll pass on creating a precedent.

    • The Pantser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Now imagine the legal clusterfuck if he is kept off the ballot and wins a write-in campaign.

      But that would require his fanbase knowing how to write and spell. There is a very good chance they are too lazy to do it too.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Write-in campaigns have different rules in different states. It’s a logistical nightmare for him to win this way. Besides, American voters are lazy as fuck. Think 10’s of millions will take the time to scratch his name on a ballot?

    • PeterPoopshit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe you’re right. Trump is such an idiot he’ll be running independently even if he’s banned from half the states which will take votes from whatever other asshat they replace him with.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That would be great for democracy, because it might break up the GOP and create demand for more equitable voting practices, like ranked choice. Plus, they’d lose by an unchallengeable margin.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The GOP breaking up, which won’t happen, would be terrible for democracy. No way rank choice is going to be rolled out under single party rule. As bad as two parties are, one party is a nightmare.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah, I’m saying that the GOP, in an effort to salvage their own party and relevance, will support ranked choice voting to let voters pick Trump and a second choice. I don’t expect the GOP to actually split permanently, but Trump isn’t going to bow out. So if they want to run a candidate who hasn’t been indicted for nearly 100 different charges, ranked choice would be a boon.