-
It was a unanimous decision...
Makes sense too imo. States shouldn't be able to disqualify presidential candidates otherwise you start getting politically motivated removals which would block R or D candidates from getting enough electoral college votes to get over the line.
Let's hope the more serious decision around presidential immunity is a different outcome though...
Soul-
I just came back myself to correct that it was unanimous, yes.
Let's hope the more serious decision around presidential immunity is a different outcome though...
And you're damn right here.
-
It's a big game dirty game though - this one looks like the democrats looking to curtail the republican's ability to use muh-states-rights to do things like ignore election results and for the electoral college to vote for their preferred candidate.
Not that the Supreme Court gives a fuck about even pretending to hold with precedent any more.
-
Slight nuance that it was the courts, not the political leaders, that disqualified the presidential candidate, on grounds ostensibly stemming from (what is meant to be) an objective, apolitical, authoritative interpretation of law. We all know the judiciary is partisan in the country but I don't know if they've been this brazen about it before. Makes nonsense of the slippery slope argument Trump's team was running (or on the other hand tantamount to an admission that the Emperor indeed has no clothes and their whole legal system is trash).
c00ps
NotThamesWater
youClown
Rigged Supreme Court does what it was put there to do...
(edit - unanimous, as below)