Full List of States Where Donald Trump Could Be Kicked Off the Ballot

[Credence]

General thread will include states filing lawsuits to have Trump's name removed from ballot:



Donald Trump is facing calls to be blocked from running for president in 2024 over allegations that his actions around January 6 violated his constitutional oath.

There are currently attempts by advocacy groups and individuals to have Trump's name removed from state ballots next year over claims he violated section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says that a person who "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" after taking an oath of office to support the Constitution should be prevented from running for office again.

There have also been calls for secretaries of state to block Trump from the ballots over allegations he engaged in an insurrection attempt in order to keep him in power after he lost the 2020 election. In most states, the secretary of state is also the chief election official who can decide if a candidate is qualified to run for president.

Trump, the frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary, has denied all wrongdoing in connection to the riot at the Capitol on January 6, and has described the calls to invoke the 14th Amendment to stop him running for office again as a "trick" to prevent him winning the race next year.

Full list of states where Donald Trump could be kicked of...

The former president is accused of having "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" on January 6 and therefore violating section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Jkca1]

Stop this nonsense. Let him on all the ballots. It will just make his losing again that much sweeter.

 

[Perotista]

General thread will include states filing lawsuits to have Trump's name removed from ballot:



Donald Trump is facing calls to be blocked from running for president in 2024 over allegations that his actions around January 6 violated his constitutional oath.

There are currently attempts by advocacy groups and individuals to have Trump's name removed from state ballots next year over claims he violated section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says that a person who "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" after taking an oath of office to support the Constitution should be prevented from running for office again.

There have also been calls for secretaries of state to block Trump from the ballots over allegations he engaged in an insurrection attempt in order to keep him in power after he lost the 2020 election. In most states, the secretary of state is also the chief election official who can decide if a candidate is qualified to run for president.

Trump, the frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary, has denied all wrongdoing in connection to the riot at the Capitol on January 6, and has described the calls to invoke the 14th Amendment to stop him running for office again as a "trick" to prevent him winning the race next year.

Full list of states where Donald Trump could be kicked of...

The former president is accused of having "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" on January 6 and therefore violating section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

www.newsweek.com

I’m not sure the secretaries of state have the authority to remove Trump from their state ballots. Trump hasn’t been convicted of being an insurrectionist nor for aiding and abetting in an insurrection. Supposedly in this country one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It also should be noted that none of the 91 charges brought against Trump so far has accused him of being an insurrectionist. Hence, Trump can’t be convicted of being one even if he is found guilty on all 91 charges.

If and when one of these four states were to remove Trump from the ballot, an immediate lawsuit would follow to reinstate him. Which would probably be taken all the way to the SCOTUS. The crux of the matter I think would be, can a state secretary of state declare Trump an insurrectionist without due process of the law? Does one’s personal opinion in this case even if that person is a state secretary of state has the authority to decide on his own or make the final decision that Trump is an insurrectionist? I don’t know, but I do doubt it.

Then if one state declares Trump an insurrectionist, what about all other states? Could Trump be an insurrectionist in one state, but not in another or does there have to be uniformity of the law that applies to all 50 states? Perhaps it must be a federal official with legal standing or a federal court of law that must find Trump guilty of being an insurrectionist or having the federal power to declare Trump as such to make the charge have legal standing in all 50 states.

Seems to me if Trump is an insurrectionist barred from running for elected office by the 14th amendment, that the 14th amendment must be enforced across all the U.S., not just in one, two, three or four states. I don’t know, but it makes no sense to me Trump could be an insurrectionist barred from serving as president or any other elected office in by one state, but not in all others.

Since I don’t know the answers, I’m sure they’ll come if one of these four states does bar Trump from running for president in their state. Meanwhile, I’ll sit back and relax with a cup of coffee or two watching all these events unfold and the questions be answered.

 

[Captain Mars]

Add California to the list.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/18/democrats-effort-kick-trump-off-california-ballot-00116476
California Dems consider unique approach to getting Trump off ballot

 

[bomberfox]

Stop this nonsense. Let him on all the ballots. It will just make his losing again that much sweeter.

No.

 

[Captain Mars]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/12/minnesota-lawsuit-trump-14-amendment
Minnesota lawsuit seeks to bar Trump from ballot under 14th amendment

 

[bomberfox]

No holds barred war against trumpism is necessary.

 

[Helix]

The list should include every state.

 

[Captain Mars]

I’m not sure the secretaries of state have the authority to remove Trump from their state ballots. Trump hasn’t been convicted of being an insurrectionist nor for aiding and abetting in an insurrection. Supposedly in this country one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It also should be noted that none of the 91 charges brought against Trump so far has accused him of being an insurrectionist. Hence, Trump can’t be convicted of being one even if he is found guilty on all 91 charges.

If and when one of these four states were to remove Trump from the ballot, an immediate lawsuit would follow to reinstate him. Which would probably be taken all the way to the SCOTUS. The crux of the matter I think would be, can a state secretary of state declare Trump an insurrectionist without due process of the law? Does one’s personal opinion in this case even if that person is a state secretary of state has the authority to decide on his own or make the final decision that Trump is an insurrectionist? I don’t know, but I do doubt it.

Then if one state declares Trump an insurrectionist, what about all other states? Could Trump be an insurrectionist in one state, but not in another or does there have to be uniformity of the law that applies to all 50 states? Perhaps it must be a federal official with legal standing or a federal court of law that must find Trump guilty of being an insurrectionist or having the federal power to declare Trump as such to make the charge have legal standing in all 50 states.

Seems to me if Trump is an insurrectionist barred from running for elected office by the 14th amendment, that the 14th amendment must be enforced across all the U.S., not just in one, two, three or four states. I don’t know, but it makes no sense to me Trump could be an insurrectionist barred from serving as president or any other elected office in by one state, but not in all others.

Since I don’t know the answers, I’m sure they’ll come if one of these four states does bar Trump from running for president in their state. Meanwhile, I’ll sit back and relax with a cup of coffee or two watching all these events unfold and the questions be answered.

I could have this wrong, but what I am gathering from these suits is that an entity with standing files an objection to a person being on the ballot and the Secretary of State then has to respond to that objection. Not sure if some of the SoS have the option of rejecting the requests, and the goal IS to have it go before the courts for a final determination. A conviction does not disqualify Trump from the ballot. It also doesn't prevent him from serving if elected. So, whether it is Trump or any other person who seeks to usurp the government, the 14th Amendment is the only option available to protect the country from the populist demagogues that Hamilton warned of in the Federalists Papers.

 

[Perotista]

I could have this wrong, but what I am gathering from these suits is that an entity with standing files an objection to a person being on the ballot and the Secretary of State then has to respond to that objection. Not sure if some of the SoS have the option of rejecting the requests, and the goal IS to have it go before the courts for a final determination. A conviction does not disqualify Trump from the ballot. It also doesn't prevent him from serving if elected. So, whether it is Trump or any other person who seeks to usurp the government, the 14th Amendment is the only option available to protect the country from the populist demagogues that Hamilton warned of in the Federalists Papers.

I don’t know myself. Ultimately, it seems it will be the courts that decide. I agree, whoever brings the lawsuit must have legal standing to bring it. I don’t think the SOS has the power of decision on the matter. But I’m about as far away from being a lawyer or legal scholar as one can get.

What we may have is one state court saying one thing, another state court saying the opposite or another. I think ultimately, it will be the SCOTUS to decide.

 

[Fletch]

Stop this nonsense. Let him on all the ballots. It will just make his losing again that much sweeter.

There is absolutely no reason to believe Biden has a lock on winning reelection.

 

[Captain Mars]

I don’t know myself. Ultimately, it seems it will be the courts that decide. I agree, whoever brings the lawsuit must have legal standing to bring it. I don’t think the SOS has the power of decision on the matter. But I’m about as far away from being a lawyer or legal scholar as one can get.

What we may have is one state court saying one thing, another state court saying the opposite or another. I think ultimately, it will be the SCOTUS to decide.

I agree and I've come to the conclusion that it is a necessary path that needs to be explored and resolved. It's not about the political parties or election interference, but about the legal implications and how populist movements impact Democracy.

 

[Lovebug]

I’m not sure the secretaries of state have the authority to remove Trump from their state ballots. Trump hasn’t been convicted of being an insurrectionist nor for aiding and abetting in an insurrection. Supposedly in this country one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It also should be noted that none of the 91 charges brought against Trump so far has accused him of being an insurrectionist. Hence, Trump can’t be convicted of being one even if he is found guilty on all 91 charges.

If and when one of these four states were to remove Trump from the ballot, an immediate lawsuit would follow to reinstate him. Which would probably be taken all the way to the SCOTUS. The crux of the matter I think would be, can a state secretary of state declare Trump an insurrectionist without due process of the law? Does one’s personal opinion in this case even if that person is a state secretary of state has the authority to decide on his own or make the final decision that Trump is an insurrectionist? I don’t know, but I do doubt it.

Then if one state declares Trump an insurrectionist, what about all other states? Could Trump be an insurrectionist in one state, but not in another or does there have to be uniformity of the law that applies to all 50 states? Perhaps it must be a federal official with legal standing or a federal court of law that must find Trump guilty of being an insurrectionist or having the federal power to declare Trump as such to make the charge have legal standing in all 50 states.

Seems to me if Trump is an insurrectionist barred from running for elected office by the 14th amendment, that the 14th amendment must be enforced across all the U.S., not just in one, two, three or four states. I don’t know, but it makes no sense to me Trump could be an insurrectionist barred from serving as president or any other elected office in by one state, but not in all others.

Since I don’t know the answers, I’m sure they’ll come if one of these four states does bar Trump from running for president in their state. Meanwhile, I’ll sit back and relax with a cup of coffee or two watching all these events unfold and the questions be answered.

This

 

[Perotista]

I agree and I've come to the conclusion that it is a necessary path that needs to be explored and resolved. It's not about the political parties or election interference, but about the legal implications and how populist movements impact Democracy.

I always a populist movement was a positive as it usually brings a problem or an issue that is under the radar to the forefront. This one is different, it’s all about a man, not an issue or problem, not even a political ideology. As I said before, Trump doesn’t have a political ideology or philosophy. The seven-time party switcher has always adopted whatever political philosophy of the party he belonged to at the time. Those who follow him have basically thrown their political beliefs and conservative ideology out the window. It isn’t conservative vs. liberal anymore. But all about one man and his quest to return to power.

 

[Perotista]

This

I’m not sure if you were agreeing with what I said or pointing out what Mycroft said. If it’s the latter, the democrats have a problem. Biden is as disliked and not wanted to be the next president among all Americans as Trump is. That I’ve pointed out many times. Instead of posting all the numbers I’ve been posting for quite a while. Here’s an article that should worry all anti-Trumpers, especially Democrats.

Top Democrats’ Bullishness on Biden 2024 Collides With Voters’ Worries

https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-democrats-bullishness-biden-2024-142012654.html

If the election were held today, Trump stands a 50-50 shot at regaining the white house.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2024 - General Election: Trump vs. Biden

RealClearPolitics - Election 2024 - General Election: Trump vs. Biden

www.realclearpolitics.com

and the 2024 President: Consensus Electoral Map

2024 Presidential Election Consensus Forecast - 270toWin

The consensus ratings from numerous forecasters for the 2024 presidential election.

www.270towin.com

 

[Cordelier]

General thread will include states filing lawsuits to have Trump's name removed from ballot:



Donald Trump is facing calls to be blocked from running for president in 2024 over allegations that his actions around January 6 violated his constitutional oath.

There are currently attempts by advocacy groups and individuals to have Trump's name removed from state ballots next year over claims he violated section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says that a person who "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" after taking an oath of office to support the Constitution should be prevented from running for office again.

There have also been calls for secretaries of state to block Trump from the ballots over allegations he engaged in an insurrection attempt in order to keep him in power after he lost the 2020 election. In most states, the secretary of state is also the chief election official who can decide if a candidate is qualified to run for president.

Trump, the frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary, has denied all wrongdoing in connection to the riot at the Capitol on January 6, and has described the calls to invoke the 14th Amendment to stop him running for office again as a "trick" to prevent him winning the race next year.

Full list of states where Donald Trump could be kicked of...

The former president is accused of having "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" on January 6 and therefore violating section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

www.newsweek.com

States do not have the authority to remove anyone from the ballot via the 14th Amendment. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment clearly delegates enforcement of the various provisions of the 14th Amendment to Congress, via appropriate legislation. In making Insurrection a Federal crime, Congress has exercised that power and, accordingly, to be considered guilty of insurrection, one has to be convicted of the crime.

 

[Lovebug]

I’m not sure if you were agreeing with what I said or pointing out what Mycroft said. If it’s the latter, the democrats have a problem. Biden is as disliked and not wanted to be the next president among all Americans as Trump is. That I’ve pointed out many times. Instead of posting all the numbers I’ve been posting for quite a while. Here’s an article that should worry all anti-Trumpers, especially Democrats.

Top Democrats’ Bullishness on Biden 2024 Collides With Voters’ Worries

https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-democrats-bullishness-biden-2024-142012654.html

If the election were held today, Trump stands a 50-50 shot at regaining the white house.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2024 - General Election: Trump vs. Biden

RealClearPolitics - Election 2024 - General Election: Trump vs. Biden

www.realclearpolitics.com

and the 2024 President: Consensus Electoral Map

2024 Presidential Election Consensus Forecast - 270toWin

The consensus ratings from numerous forecasters for the 2024 presidential election.

www.270towin.com

I am agreeing with you, I'll wait and see how it plays out.
Edit
if Biden were to sit this out, who should replace him?

 

[Perotista]

I am agreeing with you, I'll wait and see how it plays out.
Edit
if Biden were to sit this out, who should replace him?

I took the long route it seems. I don’t know who would replace him. But if Biden were to withdraw, he ought to do it soon. Give the newcomers time. I can tell you what most Americans, especially independents are looking for is someone younger, a fresh younger face which would leave out the old foggies like Warren and Sanders out of the equation.

The last thing most Americans want is a rematch between Biden and Trump. But that seems set in stone. I do have my favorites, Andy Beshear, KY, Laura Kelly, KS, Tammy Duckworth, IL. All I think would be acceptable to independents where Biden and Trump aren’t. But they’d have to decide to run which I don’t think any have given running any serious thought.

Where do we go from here? I think we’ll just have to let the events unfold. What happens, happens. We know the indictments haven’t hurt Trump, that Biden and Trump have been in a basically a tie since January. That polls which include other or third party as an option, they’ve basically been 40-40-10. Biden/Trump/other. In the polls which doesn’t include other as an option, they’re still tied, but at 45-45.

We don’t know about the no labels party; we also don’t know once the trials kick off what effect they’ll have on race. Then there is always an unforeseen event or two which could upset the whole apple cart. I’ll tell you this, for this swing voter, it seems asinine to me if the goal is to win the office of the presidency for both major parties to run two disliked and unwanted candidates to become the next president. This upcoming election has all the feel of the 2016 election with low voter turnout, high third-party vote than in 2020 where we had high voter turnout and a very low third-party vote. Time will tell.

 

[Captain Mars]

States do not have the authority to remove anyone from the ballot via the 14th Amendment. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment clearly delegates enforcement of the various provisions of the 14th Amendment to Congress, via appropriate legislation. In making Insurrection a Federal crime, Congress has exercised that power and, accordingly, to be considered guilty of insurrection, one has to be convicted of the crime.

That is evidentally what is in question. Arguments have been made by Constitutional scholars that states do have that responsibility. I'm waiting on further developments.

https://www.cato.org/blog/does-section-3-fourteenth-amendment-disqualify-trump
Does Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment Disqualify Trump?

Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits anyone who has previously taken an oath of office (that is, most current and former public officials) from holding public office if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States. That raises the question of whether any of the persons who took part in unlawful efforts to block the transition of presidential office in January 2021—and if so, which ones—might be barred from future office. It also raises the question of who decides on the disqualification: the state officials who list candidates’ names on the ballot? Other officials charged with gatekeeping, such as legislative bodies in charge of accepting member credentials? Or only the courts? And if so, can they weigh the evidence on their own, or do they need to wait until there has been some previous kind of ruling that the former official engaged in insurrection?

 

[Captain Mars]

I took the long route it seems. I don’t know who would replace him. But if Biden were to withdraw, he ought to do it soon. Give the newcomers time. I can tell you what most Americans, especially independents are looking for is someone younger, a fresh younger face which would leave out the old foggies like Warren and Sanders out of the equation.

The last thing most Americans want is a rematch between Biden and Trump. But that seems set in stone. I do have my favorites, Andy Beshear, KY, Laura Kelly, KS, Tammy Duckworth, IL. All I think would be acceptable to independents where Biden and Trump aren’t. But they’d have to decide to run which I don’t think any have given running any serious thought.

Where do we go from here? I think we’ll just have to let the events unfold. What happens, happens. We know the indictments haven’t hurt Trump, that Biden and Trump have been in a basically a tie since January. That polls which include other or third party as an option, they’ve basically been 40-40-10. Biden/Trump/other. In the polls which doesn’t include other as an option, they’re still tied, but at 45-45.

We don’t know about the no labels party; we also don’t know once the trials kick off what effect they’ll have on race. Then there is always an unforeseen event or two which could upset the whole apple cart. I’ll tell you this, for this swing voter, it seems asinine to me if the goal is to win the office of the presidency for both major parties to run two disliked and unwanted candidates to become the next president. This upcoming election has all the feel of the 2016 election with low voter turnout, high third-party vote than in 2020 where we had high voter turnout and a very low third-party vote. Time will tell.

No consensus on a different Democratic candidate is a major difficulty and it is much too late for any newcomer. Incumbents have a distinct advantage with voters. The Democratic Party is presenting a united front and here is no consensus among voters as to one possible replacement candidate. Your own thoughts are a perfect example of this and I'm no better off. I don't really care much about Biden's age, though. Both parties should have been mentoring younger candidates before it came to this, but that's water under the bridge. It is what it is and we'll have to make the best of it. The rest is wishful thinking and a waste of time to my mind.

 

[Captain Mars]

Further Reading:
https://www.ncsc.org/__data/assets/...ole-of-State-Courts-in-our-Federal-System.pdf
The Role of State Courts in Our Federal System
An Analysis of How State Courts are Charged
with Implementing Federal Law

1. State courts have jurisdiction to hear federal claims. State courts routinely hear cases
arising under federal law and have done so for more than two hundred years. “[T]he constitution not
only contemplated, but meant to provide for cases within the scope of the judicial power of the United
States, which might yet depend before state tribunals. It was foreseen that in the exercise of their ordinary
jurisdiction, state courts would incidentally take cognizance of cases arising under the constitution, the
laws, and treaties of the United States.”9

At the time the U.S. Constitution was ratified and the federal system wascreated, state courts were understood to enjoy concurrent jurisdiction.10 Asthe U.S. Supreme Court explained: “If an act of Congress gives a penaltyto a party aggrieved, without specifying a remedy for its enforcement,there is no reason why it should not be enforced, if not provided otherwiseby some act of Congress, by a proper action in a State court.”11 As onecommentator has observed, “True, state courts have concurrent jurisdiction,and Congress can leave matters to them. But this is because the statecourts already had jurisdiction, which was preserved by the Constitution:Congress does not give them Article III powers; state courts would have jurisdiction of federal law issues if Congress did nothing.”12

 

[Perotista]

No consensus on a different Democratic candidate is a major difficulty and it is much too late for any newcomer. Incumbents have a distinct advantage with voters. The Democratic Party is presenting a united front and here is no consensus among voters as to one possible replacement candidate. Your own thoughts are a perfect example of this and I'm no better off. I don't really care much about Biden's age, though. Both parties should have been mentoring younger candidates before it came to this, but that's water under the bridge. It is what it is and we'll have to make the best of it. The rest is wishful thinking and a waste of time to my mind.

Yes, both candidates seem set in stone, no changing that. Age may not be an issue with you, but age is a big issue for a lot of voters.

Biden is widely seen as too old for office, an AP-NORC poll finds. Trump has problems of his own

https://apnews.com/article/biden-age-poll-trump-2024-620e0a5cfa0039a6448f607c17c7f23e

Poll: Age haunts Biden vs. “crooked” Trump

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/29/biden-trump-2024-age-legal-issues

It is as you state, it is what it is. So, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens. The problem as I see it, is most Americans don’t want neither one to run. Hence, we have the tie since January between the two with its normal ups and downs with Biden sometimes in the lead, Trump in others. Now what does this tell us about both major parties, going against what most Americans want or in this case don’t want?

 

[Captain Mars]

Yes, both candidates seem set in stone, no changing that. Age may not be an issue with you, but age is a big issue for a lot of voters.

Biden is widely seen as too old for office, an AP-NORC poll finds. Trump has problems of his own

https://apnews.com/article/biden-age-poll-trump-2024-620e0a5cfa0039a6448f607c17c7f23e

Poll: Age haunts Biden vs. “crooked” Trump

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/29/biden-trump-2024-age-legal-issues

It is as you state, it is what it is. So, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens. The problem as I see it, is most Americans don’t want neither one to run. Hence, we have the tie since January between the two with its normal ups and downs with Biden sometimes in the lead, Trump in others. Now what does this tell us about both major parties, going against what most Americans want or in this case don’t want?

Yep, nothing new there. They never listen to us, do they? We could fix everything if they did.

 

[Cordelier]

That is evidentally what is in question. Arguments have been made by Constitutional scholars that states do have that responsibility. I'm waiting on further developments.

https://www.cato.org/blog/does-section-3-fourteenth-amendment-disqualify-trump
Does Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment Disqualify Trump?

The text of the 14th Amendment (specifically Section 5) clearly gives the power of enforcement to Congress... taking the Separation of Powers doctrine into consideration, what scope would States have to usurp that power from Congress?

 

[Captain Mars]

The text of the 14th Amendment (specifically Section 5) clearly gives the power of enforcement to Congress... taking the Separation of Powers doctrine into consideration, what scope would States have to usurp that power from Congress?

To be clear, I don't know how any of this works and am reading to gain understanding. It would seem, though, that a lot of better minds than mine think that it is not only doable, but mandatory. I can only provide a quote from William Baude & Michael Stokes Paulsen, the Federalist Society conservative law professors who have written the study, The Sweep and Force of Section Three, which says;

That means that those who possess the power and duty to apply and enforce Section Three have a constitutional responsibility to do so, fairly but vigorously. If state election boards or secretaries of state determine that a candidate for state elective office or a candidate seeking to represent that state in Congress is constitutionally disqualified from holding that office, those state authorities should exercise the state-law powers they possess to remove ineligible candidates from the ballot.

They are considered to be experts in their field, so who am I to disagree. Here's a link to their paper published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4532751