deleted by creator
This is for the primary, which matters even in blue states — their delegates to the nationwide party conference are worth just as much as the red states’.
deleted by creator
It’s likely to get appealed to the Supreme Court, which would effectively do what you ask if they rule he did participate in an insurrection.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Given the very short timeframe involved I have no doubt SCOTUS will put an injunction on this ruling.
are we really supposed to be cheering for higher-ups deciding who we’re allowed to vote for?
You’re still allowed to vote for him if all the glue you’ve huffed hasn’t made you forget how to write out a name on a line.
He’s just not allowed to be on the ballot because the court determined he sacrificed his eligibility to hold the office by trying to take the office by force, which he did.
This was a decision based on him not following the rules we all need to abide by. And when you do that, there are SUPPOSED to be consequences. In fact, USA is being WAY to lenient on him.
If a candidate were foreign born, they’d be ineligible. If they were under 35, they’d be stricken as well.
We have rules regarding eligibility. If you break those rules, you’re no longer eligible.
If a state court removed a candidate because they discovered that they were actually a Canadian citizen, removing them from the ballot isn’t “deciding” who we’re allowed to vote for. It’s applying the rules.
