1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Jan 20, 2021.

  1. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Shit, I forgot to trademark it. Carry on.
     
    2muchcoffeeman likes this.
  2. Twirling Time

    Twirling Time Well-Known Member

    SCOTUS will split the baby here same as they did with Roe, with a caveat. They will rule for states to decide for themselves unless it's a state in play. Then they'll say "Whoa Nelly Roger Taney."

    Summary: Stare decisis matters with this court .... until it doesn't.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2023
    Driftwood likes this.
  3. Regan MacNeil

    Regan MacNeil Well-Known Member

    It’s almost as if the Court’s only ideological consistency is “How does this affect Leonard Leo?”
     
  4. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Nobudduh tellz ME whut ta dew.
     
  5. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Whatever the 14th Amendment provides for, or doesn't provide for, I can't stand that so many people are on board with states using the insurrection clause to keep someone from holding office. ... without any due process.
     
  6. franticscribe

    franticscribe Well-Known Member

    This line from the NYT's coverage of the Maine decision is really sticking in my craw:

    "...lawyers on both sides are asking the nation’s top court to provide guidance on an obscure constitutional amendment enacted after the Civil War, which is at the heart of the effort to block Mr. Trump from making a third White House run."

    Maine Joins Colorado in Finding Trump Ineligible for Primary Ballot

    The 14th Amendment is anything but "obscure." It is the backbone of the modern civil rights we all enjoy. At least a third of my ConLaw class years ago was on cases arising out of protections added by the 14th. The particular clause at issue could probably be fairly characterized that way, but not the amendment.

    I suppose that's what happens when news breaks while the beat reporters are on vacation, but still embarrassing.
     
  7. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    So … Lady G would beg to differ?
     
  8. Deskgrunt50

    Deskgrunt50 Well-Known Member

    He's not being thrown in prison, or worse, by the government. Is this not just part of a legal process?

    due process. noun. 1. : a course of formal proceedings (as judicial proceedings) carried out regularly, fairly, and in accordance with established rules and principles.

    Again, I don't think it will stand up without a conviction, which I guess is what you mean. And something that is increasingly unlikely to happen before the election. But it stresses the idea SCOTUS should take this up sooner than later.

    There's nothing wrong with pursuing this as a Constitutional question.
     
    Smallpotatoes likes this.
  9. Twirling Time

    Twirling Time Well-Known Member

    I think that is actually fair. They will discuss that before they dive into Stinky's undergarments. If Leonard Leo decides the harm to the party is too much ... prepare the West Palm Beach landfill for a mountain.

    But we're not even close to there. Nimrata and Ronald have both fallen short and the die is cast. Stinky will win Nimmy's SC in a landslide and that'll be that.
     
  10. garrow

    garrow Well-Known Member

    Insurrection, secession, mad there's no recession
    Deification, rationalization, blame the Biden administration

    Ball of collusion
    That's what the GOP is today
     
    TigerVols likes this.
  11. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Due process is supposed to ensure fairness. It's not just about a set of nominal rules you put in place. The Russian justice system has a lot of rules in place. But it's not a fair system. What happened in Maine amounted to a single person having the discretionary power to decide that someone can't hold office in a democracy. It's actually not any different in a microcosmic sort of way.
     
  12. Deskgrunt50

    Deskgrunt50 Well-Known Member

    "Nominal rules" that happen to be in the Constitution. And are perhaps not quite entirely clear, thus the need to be argued in court. Not a damn thing wrong with that.

    There was nothing wrong with trump going to court 60 times (and losing 60 times) in an effort to overturn election results. And there's nothing wrong with pursuing this in court. The "one person in Maine" theory isn't going to be the final word, of course. I'd have an issue with that too, if it was in any way final.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page