this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
72 points (92.9% liked)

News

23310 readers
3549 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Despite keeping him on the presidential ballot, a Colorado judge's ruling could still prove "devastating" for former President Donald Trump, a former solicitor general has said.

Speaking with MSNBC host Jen Psaki on Sunday afternoon, former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal said that a Colorado court finding that Trump engaged in insurrection against the government after the 2020 presidential election was "the very worst decision Trump could get."

"There's a factual finding that the judge said, which is that Trump committed insurrection," Katyal said of District Judge Sarah B. Wallace's ruling. "On appeals, the factual findings get massive deference by the appeals court. It's almost impossible to overturn a trial judge's factual finding."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I'm not following how it was a factual finding that he did commit insurrection, the Constitution says people who committed insurrection are barred from office, but the court ruled he should stay on the ballot.

[–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

The judge stated that the president is not an "official of the United States" which is obviously flawed. So if/when that flawed decision gets overturned on appeal, he is then off the ballot since the facts have already shown he committed insurrection. It turns out that "factual" findings of a case almost never get overturned on appeal, while "legal" findings of the case often are. In essence, this judge put him in "check" and when the legal finding is overturned it will be checkmate.

[–] Iwasondigg@lemmy.one 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It could be a legal technicality like the court saying they find him guilty of insurrection but the plaintiff doesn't have standing or the court doesn't have authority to kick him off the ballot, so they're punting up to a higher court. I wish a legal expert would break it down for us lay people.

[–] eagleth@reddthat.com 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I believe the actual reasoning is that that amendment only applies to "officers of the us government", which the president is not... which is a stupid technicality...

[–] potterpockets@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

Correct. Setting aside other comments made which lead myself and others to argue that this is a bad faith/cowardly ruling, they posit it only covers military officers and legislative representatives to prevent them from being able to serve. Not the executive branch.

They then go on to specify that the Commander in Chief capacity in which Trump served is in he is in charge of the military, but is a representative of the public with the military subordinated to civilian authority. Not as a military officer within the structure of the armed forces.

Therefore, per this very, very pedantic (though arguably technically correct) reading of the law, they are arguing it should not be used to bar him from being on the ballot.

It’s like saying “i dont want any berries in my food” and being served strawberries. Scientifically/technically speaking they do not meet the definition. But in common parlance, understanding, and intention they are understood to be and lumped in with them.

[–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

But that's the point. The "stupid technicality" will be what is appealed and, if/when overturned, Trump will be FUBAR.

[–] MrFappy@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Maybe because this is simply an attempt to bar him from the primary ballot, and being in the ballot is one thing, but being elected and serving are another.

[–] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

The judge ruled that the President is not an officer of the Unites States, despite clearly establishing him as the Chief Executive Officer of the Unites States earlier in the case.