Four of the nine justices - its three liberal members and its newest member - disagreed with the rest of the court about decision, saying the outcome powered by five conservative justices went further than necessary.

It ruled that barring state enforcement avoids a “patchwork” of candidates being declared ineligible in some states but not others. On that point all the justices agreed.

But liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, as well as conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, in separate opinions faulted the other five justices for going further to specify that Section 3 can be enforced only through federal legislation. Given the profound partisan divisions in Congress, any such legislation is highly unlikely.

(George Mason University constitutional law professor) Ilya Somin said he was disappointed the justices did not delve into tricky questions that the Colorado Supreme Court tackled, including its conclusion that the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack was an insurrection and that Trump took part.

  • morphballganon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    any such legislation is highly unlikely

    I think that point is outside the scope of the law, and thus, should not be a consideration. That said, I believe a state should be able to bar a candidate from running on a state ballot, even if it is for a federal office. If Turnip Dump is the best the republicans have to offer, there should be consequences for that.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      The problem with this is that we know Republicans will abuse this to cheat. They would bar Biden in every state they can for imaginary crimes and there would be no countering it.

      • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        If a court finds that Biden has participated in an insurrection I’d be totally fine with him being removed from the ballot. Just like Trump should be. The GOP will cheat regardless of what Democrats do. There’s no point in driving policy based on what the GOP might do, they aren’t acting in good faith EVER and have no interest in a functional government. The only counter for this is removing them from office. We need to stack every possible advantage in our favor to make that happen.

        • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          No need for stacking in favor. There is need for the system to be run honestly and fairly.

          But to the retardlicans, a fair election is stacked against them.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Exactly. It is critical to consider any power and what happens when that power falls into the hands of your most hated opponent. Anything that gives the government more power or restricts the rights of the people should be highly questioned.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Anything that gives the government more power or restricts the rights of the people should be highly questioned.

          🥇 Lemmy Gold award