• Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      They already declined Jack Smith’s request to take this question up early. They clearly don’t want to touch it. Unsure if appeals will cause these removals to be stopped or allowed to continue or not. If an appeal stops his removal, I’d bet that would be their goal.

    • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Very likely they will overturn the CO decision…most of the states declining to remove him are because the party has the say on the primary ballot…its a different story on the general election though. This is what the MI court basically said. They left the challenge open for the general election qualifications.

      Also SCOTUS declined to expedite the “immunity” ruling because they likely don’t want to take it. The appeals will very likely say “the president is not a fucking King” and the SCOTUS will decline to hear the case and say “what they said.”

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is what the MI court basically said. They left the challenge open for the general election qualifications.

        I honestly think they were right on this. Ultimately the primary is an election for a private organization to decide who they are going to back as candidates for various offices. There’s no legal basis for forcing them to choose candidates who actually qualify for those offices.

        Now the general election is an entirely different boat.