• Wilco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    Yes, but if Trump refuses to leave office then he will need some serious guards. My understanding of the Constitution is that he becomes a domestic threat at that point and “fighting him” is technically legal … and required by anyone that took an oath to defend the Constitution.

    • Omega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      101
      ·
      26 days ago

      Technically he’s barred from office per the 14th amendment.

      Technically is great until it’s ignored.

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          26 days ago

          I’m pretty sure the Founders were under the impression that we’d rewrite the Constitution periodically when we discovered loopholes or other new problems they didn’t foresee.

        • mapumbaa@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          25 days ago

          It is impossible to write an eternal constitution. Believing that is the biggest flaw of the American mindset.

        • Omega@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          26 days ago

          Ideally the courts would rule on it and it would be up to congress with a supermajority to reverse it.

          To be clear, a court did rule that he committed treason and was barred from running. SCOTUS did not say they were wrong, they only stated that they (the fucking courts) did not have the power to APPLY THE CONSTITUTION.

          So yeah. It would be up to the courts to apply the constitution and SCOTUS would have the final word. I’m not sure why it would be any different from any other ammendment.

            • Omega@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              26 days ago

              If a Colorado court can decide to remove a candidate, then all the republicans need to do is get a majority in the courts of swing states and they would forever have the presidency.

              It should be up SCOTUS to validate or invalidate Colorado’s findings. It would never be Colorado as the final word. That’s how the courts already work. Lower courts rule and higher courts can take further action if needed.

              I’m all for SCOTUS reform though.

      • Coyote_sly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        “I’m sure THIS will be the time he faces consequences for blatantly regarding both law and custom! Institutional inertia will protect us now for sure!” say a bunch of ignorant shitlibs for the 1,293,762nd time.

    • loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      26 days ago

      I first took that oath 20 years ago. If orange idiot refuses to leave, I will be exercising my constitutional legal actions.

    • mapumbaa@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      25 days ago

      The constitution means whatever the guy with the biggest guns says it means.

    • dryfter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      25 days ago

      He’s already a domestic threat, he doesn’t care about the Constitution or laws