When the Supreme Court reviews Colorado’s decision to exclude President Trump from the state’s ballot, it will be delving into wholly uncharted territory.

The Supreme Court has never interpreted the constitutional provision prohibiting former office-holding insurrectionists from holding future office. Several leading constitutional scholars argue that, in part for this reason, the constitutional ban cannot be enforced without prior congressional enactment of guiding directives. The high court may consider this option to provide a welcome off-ramp.

But the position that the constitutional ban on insurrectionist office holders is not activated absent congressional legislation is not only incorrect, it also threatens the very foundations of America’s constitutional system.

  • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    They’ll probably “punt” it on principal then. We’ve seen how much they care about the constitution.

    • Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’d even dare to say that the existential threat to our foundational principles actually increases the likelihood they’ll fuckin do it.