The dispute comes from Colorado — but it could have national implications for Trump and his political fate.

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

    This is why I didn’t bother listening. I didn’t want to hear them fellate Trump for an hour or however long this hearing was.

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      It was actually 2 and a half hours (https://www.youtube.com/live/-HjgmO9C52c). I think it was worth a listen if you have the time, because if anything else, it allows you to hear the case without any media spin added. The biggest thing that surprised me is that there was no argument against Trump having engaged in an insurrection. That was basically taken as a fact. Instead the arguments were about whether or not a state has the ability to keep someone off the ballot for a federal election.

      From the questioning, it seems to me (as a layman) that the court is going to find that states don’t have the power to keep someone off a federal ballot. Which is going to leave the door open for a shit show if Trump wins the election and then there are cases saying that he’s ineligible to be president. The court and the lawyers seem aware of the chaos that will cause, but I feel like they’re going to kick the can down the road and cross their fingers that he doesn’t win.

      • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        The biggest thing that surprised me is that there was no argument against Trump having engaged in an insurrection. That was basically taken as a fact.

        Shout out to my state supreme court homies for making a solid finding of fact on the insurrection question.