In the justices’ biggest election case since Bush v. Gore, the court will be weighing arguments over whether Trump is disqualified from reclaiming the White House.
The disconnect is that this case isnt determining whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection. There is already a case going on to determine that. And it’s just common sense that it goes in that order, he has to be found guilty of insurrection before he can legally be labeled as an insurrectionist.
Okay but that already happened. There’s another case determining the part about whether he goes to jail for it, but that he is an insurrectionist per the amendment is already resolved.
It’s not resolved, this is the same case, a higher court can overrule their decision. It was never their jurisdiction to decide if he committed federal crimes.
Right. It was their jurisdiction to decide if he was an insurrectionist per the amendment. They did, he is. Federal crimes is a different case. Just like the recent defamation case ruled he was a sexual assaulter. Wasn’t a criminal case, didn’t carry the risk of jail time, did have consequences.
In that case, the sexual assault had no consequences, it was a defamation case. Like it didnt involve him having to register as a sex offender or anything, because in the eyes of the law he isn’t one.
The one being relitigated here before the SC. Lowest court ruled that he was an insurrectionist, second tier ruled that president is in fact an office and that the oath for it applies.
The disconnect is that this case isnt determining whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection. There is already a case going on to determine that. And it’s just common sense that it goes in that order, he has to be found guilty of insurrection before he can legally be labeled as an insurrectionist.
Okay but that already happened. There’s another case determining the part about whether he goes to jail for it, but that he is an insurrectionist per the amendment is already resolved.
It’s not resolved, this is the same case, a higher court can overrule their decision. It was never their jurisdiction to decide if he committed federal crimes.
Right. It was their jurisdiction to decide if he was an insurrectionist per the amendment. They did, he is. Federal crimes is a different case. Just like the recent defamation case ruled he was a sexual assaulter. Wasn’t a criminal case, didn’t carry the risk of jail time, did have consequences.
In that case, the sexual assault had no consequences, it was a defamation case. Like it didnt involve him having to register as a sex offender or anything, because in the eyes of the law he isn’t one.
Which case was that which already happened?
The one being relitigated here before the SC. Lowest court ruled that he was an insurrectionist, second tier ruled that president is in fact an office and that the oath for it applies.
No